The Partnership: Five Cold Warriors and Their Quest to Ban the Bomb

by Philip Taubman

Offering a clear analysis of the danger of nuclear terrorism and how it can be prevented, The Partnership sheds light on one of the most divisive security issues facing Washington today. Award-winning New York Times journalist Philip Taubman illuminates our vulnerability in the face of this pressing terrorist threat—and the unlikely efforts of five key Cold War players to eliminate the nuclear arsenal they helped create. Bob Woodward calls The Partnership a “brilliant, penetrating study of nuclear threats, present and past,” and David Kennedy writes that it is “indispensable reading for all who would understand the desperate urgency of containing the menace of nuclear proliferation.”

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Politics

496 pages, Hardcover

First published January 3, 2012

Reviews

[Richard Buro · Rating 5 out of 5]

The short version first . . .

Since August 9, 1945 the world has been under a mushroom cloud and the dire threats posed by nuclear weapons. With two Japanese cities destroyed, a death toll in the tens of thousands with many more injured in various and, in sometimes horrific ways, it was clear to the Japanese people as well as the American leadership that these were weapons almost to destructive to use, even in a World War (the second one was closed on August 14, 1945 when the Japanese surrendered unconditionally). With the end of World War II, America was, for a brief period of time, the sole country in possession of nuclear weapons, the means and ways to develop, improve, and eventually build a tiered structure of weapons for use in various scenarios.

The sole possession ended only four short years later when the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR or CCCP in the Cyrillic alphabet, detonated an atomic device on August 29, 1945. The arms race which followed between the USSR and the United States was one of the principal products of the Cold War which lasted until 1990. In those 45 years, 5 other countries, England, France, China, India, and South Africa; have developed smaller nuclear arsenals of their own. Israel is expected to have some nuclear weapons, but to date it has not tested any of its suspected weapons. Since the end of the Cold War, the breakup of the USSR resulted in several newly formed countries to be the home of a substantial part of the Russian arsenal. By 1996, those warheads had been returned to Russian control. Ending the millennium, Pakistan tested its first weapon in 1996, followed by North Korea in 2003. Only a limited test ban treaty has been in place since the late 1950s, and a Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) has been in works since 1996, but it has not been ratified by the Senate by any administration from 1996 to date despite President Obama’s desire for us to do so as it is in the national security interests of the United States to do so. There is also a movement for abolishing all nuclear weapons anywhere on Earth or in the space above our home planet. This brings us to The Partnership: Five Cold Warriors and Their Quest to Ban the Bomb by Philip Taubman.

In The Partnership, Mr. Taubman chronicles the efforts of a small, powerful group of five men, two Democrats and two Republicans and one independent theoretical physicist. The group included former two Secretaries of State, one Secretary of the Treasury, one long time United States Senator, and an Assistant Secretary of Defense. They are five men with divergent views of what needs to be done about nuclear weapons that have come together to have a meeting of the minds on a topic near and dear to each of them in his own way – nuclear non-proliferation leading to nuclear weapon abolishment. Mr. Taubman provides us with a view of the world for the past 75 years focused on one thing: nuclear science used to create horrific weapons of mass destruction with long lasting effects that cause certain things to remain unusable for years or decades or even (in some cases) centuries. In The Partnership, Mr. Taubman provides a cogent, masterfully written history of how five different men from a cross section of experience, training, service both in and out of government, and finally sharing a common view – a bold view – an amazing view – a world without the threat of nuclear weapons where man can actually think about a future with a lot less concern about dystopia in the form of mushroom clouds and rampant radioactive elements that can cause cancer, and (with enough exposure) a horrific death from radiation poisoning. They were there at Reykjavík when President Reagan and Soviet Premier Mikael Gorbachov drilled down to as close as we have ever come to a significant scaling down of our arsenals, an event marred by one point of Reagan intransigence – a antimissile shield over the two capitals – Washington, DC and Moscow.

Since 1996, we have been discussing the existing Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty or CTBT, which would prevent all explosive tests involving nuclear detonations underground. It would also incentivize steps to end and dismantle all nuclear fuel enrichment programs that can lead to high grade fissile materials being created to be used in nuclear weapons as their principal source of energy, a source which has devastating results in the two so far deployed in warfare as well as several hundred tests some above ground, some in space, and many underground. The last United States test was made in 1992, but other countries like North Korea are detonating test devices within a few months of my completion of this book. The task is large, it is diverse, and it is brought together five determined men with a vision, a vision of a world without nuclear weapons.

To the work itself, Mr. Taubman’s 30 years of experience in newspaper and magazine reporting, writing and editing, shows in his sources the best. His effort and time were spent in one-one, or more-on-one interviews, some lengthy. Getting the “five W’s and the H” shines through as well in his writing. The Who, What, Where, Why, and When as well as the How were in evidence in all of his writing and his interviewing. This made the book vibrant, magical, and mystical as the reader is immersed in a field of incredible power, intensity that is off the scale, and the resulting desolation is nothing less than demoralizing. Mr. Taubman’s discussion of the conferences, the editing sessions for the soon-to-become series of Wall Street Journal op-ed pieces, and the convergence of men with a divergence of acceptance on key issues and the coalition that forms away from the debate that brings a synergy and synthesis that far outstretches the wildest dreams and the faintest of hopes, but in the end, and the final analysis it is just those same me who reach a compromise and a commitment to move the intransigent planet writhing and wriggling away from where it disparately needs to go – nuclear weapons existing = 0, verified, proven, documented, and complete with ongoing monitoring and on-site verification.

Recommendations time --- Mr. Taubman’s work is truly amazing in its capture of the desires, wishes, and dreams of five men serving the rest of the planet in quest of a different kind of grail, this one an atomic one consisting of a single atom, electrons orbiting the center, peaceful, non-threatening, and calm. His style is deeply moving and at times almost frantic as some of the discussions reach a nearly impossible target and just miss. He captures the spirits and the hearts of the leaders and this partnership of five dedicated to the goal of developing, adjusting, and complying with their ideas on the goals needed to get to Nuclear Zero. There are large sections of the end of the book devoted to a detailed index, endnotes, and a bibliography of some many divergent sources it was almost too much to see and take in -- very diverse, all on point – amazing!! The content is technical in spots, disturbing in places too, but it is not gratuitous with those elements, and its tone of reducing these horrific consequences holds a good deal of hope. While it is lengthy, it does cover the better part of a century in which we palmed the nuclear genie out of the bottle, have him show us how two wishes came true at the expense of a quarter million dead and wounded Japanese citizens. It also shows a determined President Barack Obama who led his strategic vision with a desire to see the Partnerships goals as the watchword and touchstone of his Presidency’s foreign service and strategic policy initiatives. In his time in office, the closure on the CTBT (Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty) still has not been considered by the Republican leadership, but there have been some changes in those areas as well. As a hope for our children’s world and their children’s world to come, it deserves a wide audience. It is more historical and a bit political, but it provides an excellent look in depth at a topic we universally avoid due to its effects, but it needs a greater readership. It is a message of hope, and that right now, is something that we all need – and need it abundantly. Clearly 5 stars, and it should be considered for serious reading in the upper grade levels of schools particularly in discussions of current history and politics. It is also a fine example of solid devoted information gathering and research thoroughness in depth and on point. The Partnership is an in-depth look at how modern day compromise can be obtained on topics incredibly needed and much discussed to reach a final grand compromise that has moved our world closer to the day when we won’t be worried about mushroom clouds but more about did we remember to get those mushrooms for an addition to dinner for tonight? Enjoy – it was a great read!!

The following sources were consulted in writing this review.
Books
Taubman, Philip , The Partnership: Five Cold Warriors and Their Quest to Ban the Bomb. HarperCollins, 2012.
Richard Rhodes, Dark Sun: The Making of the Hydrogen Bomb. Simon & Schuster, 1995.
Richard Rhodes, The Making of the Atomic Bomb. Simon & Schuster, 1996.

Websites

NTI Nuclear Threat Initiative
Nuclear Threat Initiative | NTI Education Tutorials
Sidney Drell biographical information
History of Nuclear Weapons
Soviet Nuclear Test Summary
Soviet Union Nuclear weapons history
History of nuclear weapons - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Cold War Soviet Union History of nuclear weapons


Review of The Partnership: Five Cold Warriors and their Quest to Ban the Bomb by Philip Taubman by Richard Buro is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/1615452654 .
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://co

[Steve Smits · Rating 4 out of 5]

Nuclear strategy during the Cold War had on its face a kind of Alice in Wonderland logic. Having thousands of weapons, enough to eradicate entire civilizations, was safer than not having any. Eschewing promises to never launch the weapons on a first strike, despite no offensive intent to ever do so, blocked enemies from launching theirs -- a "launch on warning" posture made each side very cautious. The possibility that escalation to nuclear weapons might stem from conventional war kept the powers from risking war. Low-yield tactical nuclear weapons (so-called battlefield nukes) were more dangerous than mega tonnage weapons because their limited destructive capacity made their use easier to contemplate. Huge stockpiles of nuclear weapons that could destroy entire populations are more cost-effective than maintaining large conventional forces. Anti-nuclear defensive weapons, i.e. the SDI "Star Wars" plan of the Reagan years, were actually destabilizing to the balance of terror since being protected from the others' nukes meant you could use your own with impunity. Perhaps the most illogical aspect of nuclear weapons systems is that, even though the consequences of their use are almost too horrible to contemplate, the weapons were controlled by hair trigger protocols -- decision makers had literally minutes to decide to launch and a single human or mechanical error could unleash Armageddon on the world.

This is all quite scary, but one could fairly conclude that these strategies worked. Nuclear weapons were not once used after their first introduction against Japan. The 20th century saw two great wars in its first half with tens of millions of casualties. There were none in the century's second half, perhaps due to fear of escalation to nuclear weapon use. Indeed, the two great powers controlling nuclear arms, despite their bitter, hostile relationship, were, but for a few close calls, exceedingly cautious in keeping the lid on rising tensions.

But, the Cold War is over. So, what should be the strategy governing nuclear weapons in the 21st century? If our nation once needed massive stocks of nuclear arms to check the aggression of hostile foes, who are these foes now? If deterrence once worked, what or who are we needing to deter now? If we need to retain nuclear weapons in our national armory for the possibility that they might be needed in the future, do we really need thousands of them? Are the instantaneous launch protocols of the past worth the risk of accidental use?

In this post Cold War world, there still remains significant institutional commitment -- military, policy think tanks, techno-industrial -- to the policies of the last 70 years. Isn't it time to think and act outside the Cold War strategy box? When the world conditions underpinning the logic of deterrence strategies no longer exist, it becomes pointless, and dangerous, to continue those strategies. But, the task of disengaging is actually quite complex, in some respects made difficult by the changed conditions.

Fortunately, the vital challenge to move beyond Cold War strategies has been taken on by five prominent leaders as told in The Partnership by Philip Taubman. Perhaps ironically these leaders are among the fathers of the nuclear policies of the last seventy years, the authors of the doctrines they now feel misdirected: Henry Kissinger, George Schultz, Sam Nunn, and William Perry. Sidney Drell, a physicist and weapons expert, joined the four in this undertaking. These statesmen have not only seen the wisdom of de-escalating the place of nuclear weapons in the nations that possess them, but envision moving toward complete abolition. In 2008, after intense deliberation and collaboration, the five authored an Op-Ed column in the Wall Street Journal that called for radical reorientation of nuclear policy, including ultimately, steps to ultimately abolish nuclear arms altogether. Their lofty reputations and international standing lends enormous credibility to their recommendations.

In the first decades of the 21st century the challenges of nuclear weapons and nuclear materials are vastly more complicated than the issues of the past. The first challenge is the sheer size of nuclear arsenals. Between the Soviet Union and the United States there was at its zenith over 70,000 nuclear warheads. The work in the 1990's and early 2000's to remove weapons from former Soviet republics is rightly hailed as a major accomplishment, as was the reduction of delivery systems. Notwithstanding these successes, the size of the arsenals can only continue the risk of mishap -- the greater the quantity the greater the risk. (And, isn't the risk still greater as our concentration on nuclear weapons wanes?) While reductions were made following the dissolution of the Soviet Union the downsizing initiative seem to have stalled.

The second problem haunting the nuclear stage is the proliferation of weapons among various states across the globe: India, Pakistan, Israel, North Korea and, possibly soon, Iran. Successes were gained in persuading some countries tinkering with acquiring nuclear arms (South Africa, Libya and Brazil) to drop their development, but the presence of these weapons in the remaining states - several of which are unstable or with ideological axes to grind -- is of great concern. Undoubtedly, it will be a heavy lift to stop further proliferation and entice these states to give up their nuclear arms. The proliferation problem is made more problematic because the technical ability to create nuclear weapons is no longer exclusive to the super powers.

Perhaps of greatest concern is the porous control over existing fissile materials. It is certain that terrorist groups would salivate at the prospect of obtaining highly-enriched uranium. While these substances could be used in bomb-making, a much lower tech possibility is so-called "dirty bombs" whose detonation, while not capable of nuclear fission, would spread deadly radioactive toxins over wide areas. A dirty bomb set off in a major metropolitan center would result in many thousands of casualties. Unlike the nukes of old, these bombs don't need sophisticated delivery systems; they could be carried in a trunk. Moreover, the retaliatory check on the Cold War nuclear powers is meaningless to terrorists; there is nothing we could do in retaliation that would deter them. High-yield uranium stocks exist in significant quantities in many locales around the globe. Investigations have shown that these materials are poorly accounted for and stored in unsecure settings. An effort to retrieve this fissile material has been partially successful, but the lack of precise accounting hampers this initiative.

The partners have proposed bold but practical steps to reverse these disturbing situations. They have gotten endorsement from many world leaders and from the General Assembly of the UN. President Obama has shown genuine interest in advancing these goals. Along with a steady reduction of arms inventories and continued efforts at non-proliferation, the retrieval and control of high-yield uranium is a vital priority. Dissuading or preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons is critical; a nuclear Iran would be incredibly dangerous to the region and to the world. Pakistan is worrisome due to the instability of the government and its covert links to terrorist groups. North Korea has such a bizarre world view that its possession of weapons can only be viewed with the gravest concern.

The partners are hard-headed realists who know that achieving the goal of a nuclear-free world is a hard slog. One is aware that these leaders are in their last few years -- Schultz and Kissinger are past 90. It seems that to sustain their efforts and continue on toward the goals, all of us must keep this a high priority.

[Tech Historian · Rating 5 out of 5]

Good Read, Impossible Quest.

Great read and worth it just for the extended bio's of these five who lived interesting lives.
But the quest to ban nuclear weapons has a pretty strong feel of Don Quixote. It's not clear anyone now in power in any of the nuclear weapon states match their fervor for the quest.

And it just may be the lack of interest is because of something the author was either too polite to bring up with the five or just not be aware of.

During the Cold War the U.S. renounced the use of biological warfare. We physically shut down and then dismantled our bioweapons programs and destroyed our stocks of these weapons. The Soviet Union signed the Biological Weapons Convention treaty in 1975 and agreed to do the same. Instead, the Soviets hid their program and in violation of the disarmament treaty they signed began a massive buildup of weaponized biological agents - anthrax, smallpox, etc.

The Soviet Union built a weapons program that was as large as their nuclear weapons program - except we knew _nothing_ about it. Nothing. They were able to hide a weapons program that had ~65,000 thousand people working on it without us knowing about it, let alone talking about ending it (because they claimed they already had.) See "The Soviet Biological Weapons Program: A History" by Leitenberg, Zilinskas and Kuhn.

Our intelligence system failed. Our arms control treaties were negotiated with someone lying to our faces and laughing behind our backs. The consequences for our country and the world could have been horrific.

These five cold warriors were intimately involved with that failure of intelligence and those arms reduction treaties. I am all for any program that results in the massive reduction of weaponizable fissile material. However, at a minimum these five should address why if we couldn't see a weapons program as large as the Soviet Bioweapons program, why it won't happen again on the path to nuclear abolition.

[James Outzen · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book describes how five cold warriors--George Schultz, Henry Kissinger, Sam Nunn, Sidney Drell, and William Perry came together to propose the elimination of all nuclear weapons. Each of these individuals played significant roles in the Cold War advancing the nation's defenses. They reach conclusions that the nation's defense would be enhanced if nuclear weapons could be eliminated, a position that surprised many. Taubman is an excellent writer and the book is benefitted by the interviews he has conducted. It is an essential book for anyone who is interested in weapons proliferation issues.

[Heather Anderson · Rating 5 out of 5]

It's really such a good book. Here are five people who worked in different capacities during the Cold War, and their efforts to make nuclear weapons obsolete. Will they succeed in their lifetimes? Who can say? The book also chronicles recent efforts to secure loose nuclear materials from around the world, in the interest of our safety. A noble effort that really made me consider whom to vote for in this past election.

[Jackie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great book on how (and why) Kissinger, Perry, Nunn, Schultz and Drell came together to dismantle the bomb. It was fairly easy to read as well, didn't get caught up in the muddy technical stuff that usually ends up in books about nonproliferation.

[Jeremy Gerbrandt · Rating 4 out of 5]

There is a lot to learn and think about in this book.

I've always been morbidly curious about nuclear weapons; it blows me away that humans have developed the power to end the entire world and that we could do it frighteningly fast. But most of the things I knew about them was largely tied to their development and use in WWII as well as a little bit of early Cold War information. This is the first detailed book I've ever read about arms control and the role of nukes in the world post WWII.

I was fascinated reading about how different presidential administrations and political figures thought about nuclear weapons. Being able to see the Cold War through the eyes of these 5 men across both political parties and seeing how their roles gave them an ability to affect policy through being defense contractors, cabinet secretaries, senators, diplomats, and activists even after they had left office. This book gives you a lot of faith in the ability of diplomacy and co-operation to solve some of the world's big problems. Reading about Senator Nunn and his colleagues work with the Soviets in different territories during the breakup of the Soviet Union to secure their nuclear facilities and fissible materials in the interest of lowering the nuclear threat feels as close as possible to narrowing down a victory moment for the Cold War.

The book gives a full picture on how global efforts to dismantle nuclear weapons have changed as politics in the nuclear powers have changed and where they can go from here (or were in 2012). It gives good tangible steps for progress and makes me feel optimistic about the potential for a non-nuclear world.

To me, it drags in some spots, there is some repetition, there are some parts I might put in other places, but I loved it. I learned a lot, it changed some of the ways that I think about arms control, and it's comforting to know that there are people out there in high places still fighting to eliminate nuclear weapons.

[Tim · Rating 2 out of 5]

Semi-interesting if you want to know about these five characters involvement in nuclear nonproliferation issues. A bit boring at times and makes you question why you are even reading such a book. A quick Wikipedia search on the Global Zero movement would be a better use of your time...unless you have a lot of it. Too bad this book wasn't more engaging as the topic it discusses is extremely important.

[Ashley · Rating 4 out of 5]

Incredibly interesting...and more than a little disturbing. Andrea, you should avoid this book. It will give you nightmares.

[Justin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Bombs and spies oh my

[Scott · Rating 1 out of 5]

400 pages that could have been 150.

[Elise · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting history of atomic weapon abolition.