Issue No. 924, 15 July 2011 Featured Article

Issue No. 924, 15 July 2011

The following articles, papers or documents do not necessarily reflect official endorsement of the United States Air Force, Department of Defense, or other US government agencies. Reproduction for private use or commercial gain is subject to original copyright restrictions. All rights are reserved. United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530


Articles & Other Documents:

Featured Article: Pentagon Releases Strategy for Cyberspace

1. Iran Upbeat on Nuclear Talks, but Stalemate Remains 2. Iran Moves Nuclear Enrichment Programme to Underground Bunker 3. U.S., Europeans Blocked Anew at UN over Syrian Nuclear Plant 4. Lavrov Lays Out 'Step-by-Step' Approach on Iran 5. Iran Installing Advanced Nuclear Machines for Testing 6. S. Korea Seeks Budget Cuts for N. Korea Denuclearization Efforts 7. North Korea Must Be Stopped from More Attacks: Admiral Mullen 8. Calif. Woman Denies Aiding Pakistan Nuke Project 9. N-Deterrence to be Pursued 10. Activist Takes Germany to Court over Nuclear Warheads 11. U.S. May Pull Tactical Nukes Out of Europe: Report 12. Medvedev Sacks Electronic Warfare Chief 13. US, Russia Reach Agreement on Destroying Weapons-Grade Uranium 14. DHS Plans to Spend $300 Million on Troubled Radiation Detectors 15. Gen.: SpecOps, Troops Part of Future Deterrence Plan 16. Pentagon Releases Strategy for Cyberspace 17. Al-Qaeda Plot to Overthrow Saudi Regime Foiled 18. Osama Hit List: President Obama, Petraeus, Major U.S. Sporting Event 19. Iranian Missile Messages: Reading between the Lines of "Great Prophet 6" 20. How to Shave a Bundle Off the Deficit: Spend Less on Nukes 21. Good Reasons Not to Trust Iran 22. Iran Could Spread Nuclear Arms to Extremists: Expert 23. Panetta’s Challenge: China’s and Iran’s Weapons Programs

Welcome to the CPC Outreach Journal. As part of USAF Counterproliferation Center’s mission to counter weapons of mass destruction through education and research, we’re providing our government and civilian community a source for timely counterproliferation information. This information includes articles, papers and other documents addressing issues pertinent to US military response options for dealing with chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) threats and countermeasures. It’s our hope this information resource will help enhance your counterproliferation issue awareness.

Established in 1998, the USAF/CPC provides education and research to present and future leaders of the Air Force, as well as to members of other branches of the armed services and Department of Defense. Our purpose is to help those agencies better prepare to counter the threat from weapons of mass destruction. Please feel free to visit our web site at http://cpc.au.af.mil/ for in-depth information and specific points of contact. The following articles, papers or documents do not necessarily reflect official endorsement of the United States Air Force, Department of Defense, or other US government agencies. Reproduction for private use or commercial gain is subject to original copyright restrictions. All rights are reserved.


United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

The Star – Malaysia

Iran Upbeat on Nuclear Talks, but Stalemate Remains Tuesday, July 12, 2011 By Fredrik Dahl and Sylvia Westall

VIENNA (Reuters) - There was no sign of movement in the deadlock between Iran and the U.N. nuclear watchdog over Tehran's atomic activities on Tuesday despite an upbeat assessment by the Islamic state's foreign minister.

Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi said he held "very fruitful" discussions with Yukiya Amano, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and they had agreed to explore ways to help resolve outstanding issues.

He said experts will seek to create a "new mechanism" to improve cooperation between the U.N. body and Tehran, which is facing intensifying Western sanctions pressure.

But the IAEA gave a different picture, saying in a brief statement that Amano had "reiterated the agency's position on the issues where Iran is not meeting its obligations".

The IAEA has voiced growing concern in the past year about suspicions that Iran may be seeking to develop a nuclear-armed missile. The U.N. agency has repeatedly called on Tehran to engage with it to help ease such concerns.

For several years, the IAEA has been investigating Western intelligence reports indicating Iran has coordinated efforts to process uranium, test explosives at high altitude and revamp a ballistic missile cone so it could take a nuclear warhead.

Iran says the allegations are baseless and forged, and that its nuclear programme is aimed at producing electricity.

"If we wanted nuclear weapons then we would have left the NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty)," Salehi said. "We believe that atomic weapons are damaging to the international community."

Iran's refusal to halt uranium enrichment -- an activity that can have both civilian and military purposes -- has led to four rounds of U.N. sanctions on the major oil producer, as well as tighter U.S. and European Union restrictions.

DIPLOMATIC STALEMATE

Diplomatic efforts to find a solution to a dispute that has the potential to spark a Middle East conflict have stalled, after talks between Iran and six world powers half a year ago failed to make any progress.

Salehi said "very positive" conclusions were reached in his meeting with Amano. But he gave few details and there was no indication that Iran would be ready to heed demands to curb enrichment and be more transparent about its nuclear work.

He suggested Iran would be willing to discuss the allegations about suspected military-linked nuclear activities only if the Vienna-based IAEA first declared that a work plan dating back to 2007 had been finalised. Iran says it has answered all points raised under the plan agreed with the U.N. agency four years ago to help clarify the nature of Tehran's nuclear programme.

But the IAEA says Iran has failed to cooperate with it over allegations of possible military links to its atomic activities.

"The director general (Amano) indicated that he is not in a position at this stage to consider the work plan to be completed," the agency's statement said.

Western diplomats have often accused Iran of deploying stalling tactics in the nuclear dispute with major powers, including the United States, China and Russia, to buy more time while it pushes ahead with its disputed activities.



Amano has taken a blunter approach towards Iran than his predecessor Mohamed ElBaradei. Iran has accused Amano, a veteran Japanese diplomat, of taking orders from Washington.

Austrian Foreign Minister Michael Spindelegger, who met Salehi separately in Vienna, said Europe remained ready to return to the negotiating table with Iran. "It is important for us to overcome the stalemate that exists in the talks," he said.

Editing by Robert Woodward

http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2011/7/13/worldupdates/2011-07-12T224252Z_01_NOOTR_RTRMDNC_0_-582210-1&sec=Worldupdates

(Return to Articles and Documents List) The Telegraph – U.K.

Iran Moves Nuclear Enrichment Programme to Underground Bunker Iran has begun efforts to shift its nuclear enrichment programme to an underground bunker where experts warn it could stage a last dash for a nuclear weapon By Damien McElroy, Foreign Affairs Correspondent 13 July 2011

Installation of centrifuge and other manufacturing equipment was at a preparatory stage at Fowrdow, a facility deep inside a mountain near Qom, the country's holiest city, intelligence reports said.

Tehran disclosed the existence of Fordow, which is designed to withstand air and missile strikes, after Western intelligence detected the covert nuclear plant.

"They are preparing (for the centrifuges to be installed) in Fordow," a diplomat briefed on the latest intelligence said.

Fereidoun Abbasi, the head of the Iranian nuclear programme, earlier this month said Iran would triple output of uranim enriched to 20 per cent, the threshold level from which a nuclear bomb - made from material enriched to 90 per cent - is relative easy to produce.

Since it raised the level of enrichment from the 3.5 per cent purity needed for normal power plant fuel to 20 per cent last year it has produced 56.7 kilogrammes, UN weapons inspectors have reported. That is about half the amount needed for a weapon.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) which has been notified of Iran's plans to start operation enrichment centrifuges at Fordow "by this summer" has expressed concern over continuing access to the facility.

The IAEA reported that by May 21 no centrifuges - cylindrical machines that spin at supersonic speeds to enrich uranium - had been introduced into the facility.

Intelligence reports point to Iranian scientists installing 3,000 centrifuges at the site to achieve its goals. It has almost three times as many installed at Natanz, many of which have been disabled by sabotage.

Leading experts believe that the shift to the mountain facility would increase the danger of Iran successfully launching a final push to make a bomb.

"We see Iran moving in the direction of becoming a nuclear weapons capable state," said Olli Heinonen, a former head of UN nuclear inspections worldwide.

Foreign Secretary William Hague wrote in an American newspaper this week that Iran would need less that three months to turn the enriched uranium into weapons grade material at Fordow.





"That it claims to allow International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) monitoring is not a safeguard," he warned. "Iran has a persistent record of evasion and obfuscation with the IAEA."

But Iran's foreign minister, who is in Vienna for nuclear talks, said that the country had disavowed nuclear weapons.

"Our Supreme Leader has explained that the production and use of atomic weapons is wrong, not only in terms of foreign policy but on religious grounds," Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi said.

Iran says it needs 20 per cent uranium to make fuel for a medical research reactor near Tehran after the failure of talks on a deal that would have seen foreign countries supply the material.

A nine page IAEA report in May said new intelligence passed to the organisation indicated Iran was involved in studies on uranium conversion, high explosives testing and the adaptation of a ballistic missile cone that would only be useful to the production of a nuclear warhead.

The body said it had "received further information related to such possible undisclosed nuclear-related activities".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/8635644/Iran-moves-nuclear-enrichment-programme-to-underground-bunker.html

(Return to Articles and Documents List) Bloomberg News

U.S., Europeans Blocked Anew at UN over Syrian Nuclear Plant By Bill Varner July 13, 2011

The U.S. and its European allies at the United Nations are facing the same opposition to punishing Syria’s secret construction of a nuclear facility that has blocked their efforts to condemn government repression of protesters.

The Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency voted on June 9 to report Syria’s violation of nonproliferation accords to the UN Security Council. Neville Whiting, the IAEA’s director of nuclear safeguards for the Middle East, is scheduled to brief the council tomorrow on Syria’s failure to report the facility and refusal to cooperate with an investigation by the Vienna-based nuclear agency.

Russia is leading opposition in New York that will likely make the briefing and a subsequent private discussion the Security Council’s only involvement in the issue. Recognizing the division in the 15-member council, the U.S., Britain, France, Germany and Portugal haven’t sought a statement or threatened sanctions against Syria.

The Security Council should play “no role” in the matter, Russia’s Deputy Ambassador Alexander Pankin said.

“In a crime investigation, if you don’t have a corpse you don’t have a case,” Pankin said, referring to the fact that Israel destroyed the then-suspected nuclear reactor in 2007. “There is nothing there. We are not an investigation team, we are the Security Council. We deal with imminent or coming threats.”

‘Won’t Fly’

Ambassador Hardeep Singh Puri of India, a Security Council member, said that while he heard that a draft statement might be circulated to the panel, “it won’t fly.” Russia and China, which voted against the IAEA resolution, would block any proposed statement on the nuclear facility, he said.

Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the UN, acknowledged the division in the Security Council today by telling reporters that “there are several members of the council, including some veto- wielding members, who did not support the referral and who are unlikely to support a council product.”





India has joined Russia, China and Security Council members Brazil and South Africa in opposing a draft resolution condemning the repression in Syria. It’s been blocked since late May.

Asked Brazil’s view of how the Security Council should handle the Syrian nuclear issue, Ambassador Maria Viotti said there were “no grounds for doing anything.”

The UN nuclear agency concluded on May 24 that Syria was probably building a surreptitious nuclear reactor. The government in Damascus stymied IAEA inspections and limited access to the bombed site for more than three years. Investigators reported finding traces of modified uranium particles at the bombed Dair Alzour site that they said may have been residue from a reactor.

Syria’s Ambassador Bashar Ja’afari said the Security Council shouldn’t be discussing the issue. It’s the “IAEA’s business,” he said.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-13/u-s-europeans-blocked-anew-at-un-over-syrian-nuclear-plant-1-.html

(Return to Articles and Documents List) The Moscow Times

Lavrov Lays Out 'Step-by-Step' Approach on Iran 14 July 2011 Reuters

WASHINGTON — Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has laid out a "step-by-step" approach under which Iran could address questions about its nuclear program and be rewarded with a gradual easing of sanctions.

The proposal, described by Lavrov after talks with President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, seeks to revive negotiations to put to rest Western suspicions that Iran may be seeking nuclear arms.

Talks between Iran and the five permanent members of the UN Security Council — Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States — plus Germany, in Geneva in December and in Istanbul in January, failed to make headway on reining in Iran's nuclear program, which Tehran says is peaceful.

Lavrov said Russia had proposed a "phased" process in which Iran would take steps to address the concerns of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN nuclear watchdog.

"The response to each specific step of Iran would be followed by some reciprocal step, like freezing some sanctions and shortening the volume of sanctions," Lavrov said Wednesday at a news conference with Clinton.

He acknowledged differences between the Russian and U.S. stances on the issue, describing it as "yet another example of the fact that there are problems on our agenda."

Clinton did not directly address a question on her views about easing sanctions in a phased approach, but Washington has been resistant to this on the grounds that doing so would give up what leverage it has over Tehran.

"We are committed to our dual track of pressure and engagement and we want to explore with the Russians ways that we can perhaps pursue more effective engagement strategies," she said, adding that Russian and U.S. experts would discuss the issue.

The target is to hold the talks in Moscow the week of July 25, said a U.S. official who spoke on condition of anonymity.





Iran has said it is willing to resume talks with the Security Council's permanent members and Germany, but its insistence that other countries recognize its right to enrich uranium is a major stumbling block, particularly for Western diplomats who see it as an unacceptable precondition.

Separately, the State Department said Clinton and Lavrov finalized agreements on several U.S.-Russia issues, including:

-- a pact to regulate adoptions after a U.S. woman rejected her adopted Russian son and sent him back to Russia alone in April 2010; the State Department said the deal would "provide additional safeguards to better protect the welfare and interests of children and all parties involved in adoptions;"

-- an agreement committing each country to dispose of at least 34 tons of excess weapons-grade plutonium; the combined amount, 68 metric tons, represents enough material for about 17,000 nuclear weapons; disposal of the material is expected to begin in 2018, the State Department said;

-- extending a 1994 pact for U.S. and Russian scientists to collaborate on researching the effects of radiation.

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/lavrov-lays-out-step-by-step-approach-on-iran/440547.html

(Return to Articles and Documents List) Khaleej Times – U.A.E.

Iran Installing Advanced Nuclear Machines for Testing By Reuters 15 July 2011

VIENNA - Iran is stepping up centrifuge development work aimed at making its nuclear enrichment more efficient, diplomats say, signalling a possible advance in the Islamic Republic’s disputed atomic programme.

Two newer and more advanced models of the breakdown-prone machine that Iran now operates to refine uranium are being installed for large-scale testing at a research site near the central town of Natanz, the diplomats told Reuters this week.

If Iran eventually succeeds in introducing the more modern centrifuges for production, it could significantly shorten the time needed to stockpile material that can have civilian as well as military purposes, if processed much further.

But it is unclear whether Tehran, subject to increasingly strict international sanctions, has the means and components to make the more sophisticated machines in bigger numbers.

Iran denies Western accusations it is seeking to develop nuclear weapons and says it is refining uranium for electricity generation and medical applications.

Tehran’s refusal to halt enrichment has drawn four rounds of UN sanctions rounds, as well as increasingly tough U.S. and European punitive measures on the major oil producer.

Iran has for years been trying to develop centrifuges with several times the capacity of the 1970s-vintage, IR-1 version it now uses for the most sensitive part of its atomic activities.

Marking a potential step forward for those plans, diplomats said work was under way to set up two units of 164 new machines each. Until now, only smaller chains or individual centrifuges of the IR-4 and IR-2m models have been tested at the R&D site.

“They are moving forward here,” said one senior diplomat, from a member state of the International Atomic Energy Agency. “This is slow and steady but notable progress they are making.”

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/lavrov-lays-out-step-by-step-approach-on-iran/440547.html



Other diplomats confirmed that installment was taking place, but was not yet finished. There was no comment from Iran’s mission to the IAEA, the Vienna-based UN atomic watchdog.

Testing of a complete 164-centrifuge cascade has been due for a long time and it would be an “important step,” said Olli Heinonen, a former head of IAEA inspections worldwide.

UNDERGROUND BUNKER

Robert Einhorn, the US State Department’s senior adviser for non-proliferation and arms control, said in March he did not believe the newer centrifuges were ready to be mass produced, according to a transcript of a think tank debate.

“It’s taken them quite a long time to graduate ... to more advanced centrifuges. And that’s fortunate,” Einhorn said.

Iran’s main enrichment production facility is also located at the Natanz complex, which is ringed by anti-aircraft guns to protect against any threatened Israeli or US air strikes.

Thousands of old model centrifuges spin at supersonic speeds in an underground hall to increase the fissile isotope ratio.

Western experts say tightening sanctions, technical woes and possible cyber sabotage have slowed Iran’s atomic advances. But it is still steadily amassing low-enriched uranium.

“They continue to pour fairly vast resources into this effort and they are making progress,” the senior diplomat said.

Iran’s decision in early 2010 to raise the level of some enrichment from the 3.5 percent purity needed for normal power plant fuel to 20 percent worried Western states that saw it as a significant step towards the 90 percent needed for bombs.

Iran says it needs 20 percent uranium to produce fuel for a research reactor making isotopes to treat cancer patients.

But Western experts say it could enable Iran to more rapidly break out and produce weapons-grade material, if it so decided.

“The production rate of 20 percent enriched uranium far exceeds the current needs of Iran,” Heinonen said.

Tehran said in June it would shift this higher-grade activity from the Natanz plant to an underground bunker near the clerical city of Qom, and also to triple output capacity.

Diplomatic sources say Iran is now preparing to install centrifuges soon at the site known as Fordow, tucked away deep inside a mountain.

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle08.asp?xfile=data/middleeast/2011/July/middleeast_July335.xml&section=middleeast

(Return to Articles and Documents List) Yonhap News Agency – South Korea July 13, 2011

S. Korea Seeks Budget Cuts for N. Korea Denuclearization Efforts SEOUL, July 13 (Yonhap) -- South Korea's foreign ministry has asked to dedicate a smaller portion of its budget next year to efforts to resolve the standoff over North Korea's nuclear program, a lawmaker said Wednesday, as diplomacy with the North has come to a standstill.





Multilateral negotiations aimed at dismantling the North's nuclear program, involving the two Koreas, the U.S., China, Russia and Japan, have been stalled since late 2008. The North claims to be willing to return to the talks without preconditions, but South Korea and the U.S. say Pyongyang must show its sincerity in denuclearizing before resumption of the stalled talks could take place.

The ministry sought 6.7 billion won (US$6.3 million) for its 2012 budget on North Korea's nuclear program, down 23.3 percent from this year, according to a report released by Rep. Park Joo-sun of the main opposition Democratic Party.

Park, a member of the National Assembly's foreign affairs committee, said he obtained the report from the ministry.

Out of the proposed budget for dismantling the North's nuclear program, the ministry asked the National Assembly to significantly cut spending to monitor the denuclearization process in the North to 430 million won from 780 million won.

Spending on diplomats' activities related to the six-party talks was also frozen, according to the report.

As for its total budget for next year, the ministry is seeking 1.82 trillion won, a 4.7 percent increase from this year, the report said.

The ministry sought to sharply increase its budget for multilateral cooperation to 46.3 billion won next year as it is preparing to host the Nuclear Security Summit in March 2012.

The proposed budget for U.N. peacekeeping operations and financial contributions to international organizations rose 6 percent to 527.5 billion won, as South Korea pledged more aid to the international community, the report showed.

http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2011/07/13/76/0301000000AEN20110713005200315F.HTML

(Return to Articles and Documents List) International Business Times – Australia

North Korea Must Be Stopped from More Attacks: Admiral Mullen July 15, 2011

North Korea shows no sign of giving up its pursuit of nuclear weapons and remains a threat to the South, the top U.S. military official said Thursday, urging China to lean on its ally to exercise restraint.

"North Korea shows no signs of relenting in pursuit of its nuclear capabilities, and I'm not convinced that they won't provoke again," Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters during a visit to the South.

"I've said for a long time that the only thing predictable about North Korea is their unpredictability."

Mullen attended the change of command of about 30,000 U.S. troops stationed in the South to General James Thurman from outgoing commander General Walter Sharp.

"(The) expectation at least from my perspective, that unless the leadership in the North is deterred, they will continue to do that," Mullen said, referring to the sinking of a South Korean navy ship and the bombing of an island last year.

Mullen, who was in Beijing earlier, said that Chinese military leaders agreed it was important to maintain stability in North Korea. Most experts and officials believe the North Korean regime is not at risk of collapse.

But they say there are signs of discontent as the North tries to continue dynastic rule by working on succession of power from current leader Kim Jong-il to his youngest known son, Jong-un.

http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2011/07/13/76/0301000000AEN20110713005200315F.HTML



Mullen said the North's aggressive behavior toward South Korea may be linked to the succession process underway in Pyongyang.

"We have a sense of urgency to essentially work on planning to deter the North from further provocations. Whether they will be deterred or not, that's to be seen."

http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/180143/20110715/north-korea-must-be-stopped-from-more-attacks-admiral-mullen.htm

(Return to Articles and Documents List) BusinessWeek

Calif. Woman Denies Aiding Pakistan Nuke Project By DOUGLAS BIRCH, Associated Press July 13, 2011

A wealthy San Francisco-area suburbanite on Tuesday rebutted charges that she was the ringleader of a scheme to illegally export special paint used in the construction of a Pakistani nuclear plant, a project some Western experts fear will produce plutonium for the country's expanding nuclear arsenal.

Xu Wang, 51, was arrested at Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson airport last month, court records show, as she and her family were headed to Italy to celebrate her oldest daughter's graduation from prep school before starting Princeton in the fall. Wang has been in custody ever since.

At a detention hearing in federal court here, Wang's lawyers argued that charges against her were "technical," that she was at worst peripherally involved in the scheme and that any connection between the case against her and the global spread of nuclear weapons was purely speculative.

"This case is about paint," said attorney Bruce Baird, as his client sat at the defendant's table in short-sleeve prison garb. "...One thing we know for sure, it's not a case representing a threat to America or a threat of nuclear proliferation."

U.S. Magistrate Judge Deborah Robinson on Tuesday denied the government's request that Wang be held without bond, but stayed the order pending a hearing Wednesday to set the terms of her release. She and her husband had pledged to put up their $2.3 million home in Hillsborough, Calif., as collateral.

Wang, who has a doctorate in physics from the University of California, Santa Cruz, was charged with three counts of violating U.S. export laws and one count of conspiracy in connection a Chinese government-owned company's purchase of 625 gallons of paint to Pakistan's Chashma II nuclear power plant. The felony charges carry a maximum penalty of 65 years in prison and fines of more than $1 million.

The case highlights China's commercial ties to Pakistan's nuclear program. Islamabad, which has never signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, first tested a nuclear weapon in 1998 and is estimated to have built between 70 and 120 warheads in its ongoing arms race with India.

The Wang case also demonstrates the challenges prosecutors can face enforcing economic sanctions, which often involve the sale of so-called "dual-use" technology that can have civilian as well as military purposes.

Judge Robinson Tuesday appeared skeptical, questioning the prosecution's assertion that the case had "serious national security implications."

""This is not latex paint," said assistant U.S. Attorney G. Michael Harvey. "This is a very sophisticated paint, which has been tested and certified for use inside the containment facility of a nuclear reactor."





After she and her husband sold their paint import-export business to the Pittsburgh-based PPG Industries in 2006 for more than $17 million, the U.S. company hired her to run its wholly-owned Chinese subsidiary, PPG Paints Trading Co.

A short time later, the indictment says, the U.S. government rejected an application from PPG for a license to sell paint to an unnamed government-owned Chinese company, for use on the steel lining of the containment area of Chashma II.

Some U.S. experts say there is evidence Pakistan is building a plant near Chashma II to take spent fuel from the reactor and turn it into weapons grade plutonium.

When Wang told the Chinese buyers about the denial, court papers show, they complained they would be forced to scrape off PPG paint they had already applied, delaying the project. They angrily threatened to sue.

Prosecutors say Wang responded that the company should "pretend this never happened" and buy the paint through a front company. The government claims another employee later came up with a plan to have the order placed through a Chinese construction company building a nuclear plant in Dalian, China. China is not subject to the same export controls.

When a co-worker asked what would happen if the U.S. discovered the ruse, the indictment says, Wang replied: "U.S. government can't really touch us...The most that will ever happen to me is that I will not travel to the U.S. anymore. I don't need to travel to the U.S. I don't care. It's okay."

PPG Industries pled guilty in December to conspiring to violate export regulations in connection with the sale of the paint used in construction of Chashma II, and was hit with $3.75 million in fines.

Wang was fired by PPG Industries in 2007, her indictment did not come until June.

Wang's husband, Chunlin Yiang, sat in the courtroom Tuesday and, at one point, waved at his wife. In a letter to the court, he said he and his wife were committed to remaining in the United States because of their two daughters.

A younger daughter, 13, suffers from Asperger's Syndrome, he said, and is attending a school for children with learning disabilities. "We want them to achieve whatever they can achieve and live the American dream," he wrote.

The charges against Wang come at a time when the U.S. and Pakistan are trying to overcome deep mutual distrust in their joint fight against militant extremists. And it marked at least the second time in four months that the U.S. has charged someone with smuggling restricted technology to Pakistan's nuclear program.

The U.S. announced in March that it was charging a Pakistani man living in Maryland with illegally buying sensitive technology for his country's nuclear program. The indictment charged Nadeem Akhtar, 45, of Silver Spring with buying radiation detection devices, resins for coolant water purification and calibration devices for the Chashma nuclear power project and perhaps other, weapons-related facilities.

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9OEPHVO1.htm

(Return to Articles and Documents List) Dawn.com – Pakistan

N-Deterrence to be Pursued By Khawar Ghumman Friday, July 15, 2011

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9OEPHVO1.htm



ISLAMABAD: Pakistan declared on Thursday that it would continue to pursue the policy of maintaining “credible minimum deterrence” as a responsible nuclear-weapon state and cautioned the world that any nuclear policy based on partiality and preconception could disturb strategic balance in South Asia.

A meeting of the National Command Authority (NCA) presided over by Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani reviewed and approved futuristic and self-sustaining Nuclear Power Programme-2050 and Pakistan Space Programme-2040.

According to a handout issued after the meeting, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, Services Chiefs, NCA Secretary, Strategic Plans Division’s Director General and senior officials of the Pakistan Nuclear Regulatory Authority (PNRA) and Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission (PAEC) attended the meeting.

It said: “After in-depth consideration and evaluation, the NCA has decided that Pakistan will continue to pursue its policy of credible minimum deterrence.”

Without naming any country, the NCA expressed concern “over the continued pursuit of policies that detract from the globally shared norms and rules of equality, inclusiveness and objectivity”.

“The NCA cautioned that such policies represent regression in the non-proliferation regime and tend to erode the strategic balance in South Asia. Pakistan would continue to take appropriate counter measures to ensure its security and to maintain regional stability,” the handout said.

In his opening remarks at the meeting, Prime Minister Gilani said recent incidents in Abbottabad and Mehran naval base, coupled with international propaganda, had raised completely uncalled for concerns about the safety and security of country’s strategic assets.

“Such baseless, and certainly motivated, campaign against Pakistan will neither deter us from proceeding ahead sure-footed with our strategic programme nor succeed in undermining our national will. Our detractors are working overtime to malign Pakistan as well as our nuclear and strategic assets. We must remain firm in our resolve to tide over these challenges,” he said.

The NCA expressed satisfaction at the security and safety of Pakistan’s strategic programmes and facilities, and operational readiness of weapons.

The authority reiterated country’s desire to constructively contribute to the realisation of a world free of nuclear weapons and to the goals of non-proliferation on the basis of equality and partnership with the international community.

Accordingly, it said Pakistan was keen on joining the four export control arrangements. The handout said nothing about the nature of these arrangements.

The NCA reaffirmed the importance of nuclear safety and noted with satisfaction the safety review of all the existing and planned civil nuclear facilities by the Pakistan Nuclear Regulatory Authority. It directed the PNRA and PAEC to continue to ensure that programmes conformed to the highest levels of safety and international best practices.

The meeting was also briefed on the nuclear security review undertaken recently. It expressed confidence in the institutionalised command and control system and comprehensive measures put in place to ensure reliability and security of strategic assets.

The NCA said the government and people stood solidly behind the country’s nuclear and missile programmes, which would be pursued to maintain effective, reliable and credible deterrence capability, and all attempts to undermine this capability would be thwarted with full force.

The NCA also reviewed and approved Nuclear Power Programme-2050 to meet the existing energy shortfalls and to respond to the future requirements of a growing population and economy. It emphasised the need to focus on socio-economic development of the people as a foremost priority.



The meeting approved Pakistan’s Space Programme-2040 in order to bring the benefits of the full spectrum of space technology to the people of Pakistan.

http://www.dawn.com/2011/07/15/n-deterrence-to-be-pursued.html

(Return to Articles and Documents List) Deutsche Welle – German Federation 14 July 2011

Activist Takes Germany to Court over Nuclear Warheads

Retired pharmacist versus Germany: a Cologne court has begun hearing the case of an activist intent on having Germany remove US nuclear warheads being stored at a military base located in western Germany.

A court case got underway on Thursday in Cologne concerning the possible storage of up to 20 nuclear bombs at a military base in Rhineland Palatinate, which, according to Elke Koller, an anti-nuclear peace activist from a nearby village, goes against German basic law.

Koller, a retired pharmacist, sued the federal government in April 2010 to force Berlin to remove all nuclear weapons from the country - whether they belong to Germany or not.

Between 10 and 20 US B61 nuclear warheads, which have an explosive force up to 13 times that of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, are believed to be stored in highly protected underground vaults at the Büchel military base located in the low mountainous Eifel region just east of the Belgian border.

Also at the airbase is a fleet of German Tornado IDS aircraft, high-speed fighter jets equipped to carry the US bombs for deployment in case of an emergency in Europe.

Elke Koller's claim concerns the implications of this "emergency" usage; despite the fact that the bombs technically belong to the US - and can't be fired without clearance from Washington - any participation from Germany in their deployment violates the country's laws against use of "atomic, biological and chemical weapons in situations of armed conflict."

Potential threat

In her backyard garden at her home four kilometers (2.5 miles) from the base, Koller points over the distant hills to where she says the atomic bombs are located.

"I feel threatened here, yeah. I'm scared that circumstances could arise in which an enemy would want to attack this base. And there are accidents that can happen with nuclear weapons."

Koller's assumptions are based on an article published in 2003 in the biannual Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, "The B61 family of bombs," which refers to the B61 stockpile in Büchel.

When asked in an interview about the need to cope with US atomic weapons on German grounds, Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle, without referring explicitly to the officially unconfirmed storage at Büchel, said that the "removal of nuclear weapons" was one of the central aspects of Germany's contribution to global nuclear non-proliferation.

"My politics has always been against nuclear weapons and of course for the removal of nuclear weapons from Germany. But I must add that this is part of international disarmament negotiations," Westerwelle said.

Westerwelle added that much effort was needed to further nuclear disarmament and that Germany would take "no steps on its own."

For anti-nuclear protesters like Elke Koller, however, the time has arrived for action, even if it has to be "unilateral."

http://www.dawn.com/2011/07/15/n-deterrence-to-be-pursued.html



"I've never felt safe or as if I were protected by nuclear weapons. On the contrary: they are a target for enemies," a completely earnest Koller said.

"The way I see it, there are three main targets in Germany: Berlin, as capital, Frankfurt, as banking hub, and Büchel, where the nuclear weapons are."

Author: Gabriel Borrud; Editor: Andreas Illmer

http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,15234959,00.html

(Return to Articles and Documents List) Vancouver Sun – Canada

U.S. May Pull Tactical Nukes Out of Europe: Report Agence France-Presse (AFP) July 14, 2011

TOKYO — The United States is in talks with NATO to remove American tactical nuclear weapons from Europe, in a push toward a nuclear-weapons-free world and to cut costs, a Japanese newspaper said Friday.

Washington is talking with other NATO member nations about the withdrawal of all shorter-range, tactical nuclear weapons that have been deployed in Europe since the Cold War era, the influential Asahi Shimbun said.

In-depth discussions will take place in coming months and the talks should conclude by the time Chicago hosts a NATO summit next May, the liberal daily said, citing a senior U.S. official tasked with nuclear disarmament policies.

The talks are being held as part of NATO's Defense and Deterrence Posture Review, said the report filed from the paper's Washington bureau.

The move came as U.S. President Barack Obama wants to negotiate with Russia about reducing tactical nuclear weapons and nuclear stockpiles, following the ratification this year of the U.S.-Russia New START disarmament treaty, it said.

If a complete abolition in Europe is agreed, it could give impetus to U.S.-Russia nuclear disarmament talks, the mass-circulation newspaper said.

Japan is the only country to have been attacked with nuclear weapons, in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. Post-war Japan has strongly pushed nuclear non-proliferation efforts, a topic that is closely followed by Japanese media.

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/pull+tactical+nukes+Europe+Report/5105548/story.html

(Return to Articles and Documents List) Indian Express – India

Medvedev Sacks Electronic Warfare Chief Friday, July 15, 2011

Moscow - In an unusual step, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has sacked several military generals, including the Electronic Warfare chief Oleg Ivanov, following reports of differences with the top brass.

According to the Kremlin press service, Medvedev also sacked the Chief of the Mobilisation Directorate of Supreme Command Maj Gen Alexei Nesterov and Chief of the Mozhaisky Space Forces Academy Maj Gen Anatoly Perdius.

http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,15234959,00.html

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/pull+tactical+nukes+Europe+Report/5105548/story.html



Earlier this month usually well-informed 'Nezavisimaya Gazeta' reported that following the differences with the Chief of General Staff General Nikolai Makarov, several key officials including his deputy have put down their papers before Defence Minister Anatoly Serdyukov.

Those who put down papers included Chief of Main Directorate of Operations Lt.-Gen Andrei Tretyak, Chief of the Main Staff of the Land Forces Lt.-Gen Sergei Skokov, Chief of General Staff's Radio-electronic Warfare Directorate Maj-Gen Oleg Ivanov.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/medvedev-sacks-electronic-warfare-chief/817899/

(Return to Articles and Documents List)

US, Russia Reach Agreement on Destroying Weapons-Grade Uranium By RTT Staff Writer July 13, 2011

(RTTNews) - The US and Russia on Wednesday inked an agreement to dispose off huge quantities of weapons-grade uranium good enough to build around 17,000 nuclear weapons, it has been reported.

Under the terms of the deal signed by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, each side is required to dispose off 34 tons of weapons-grade uranium. The pact followed a deal reached between Clinton and Lavrov last year.

Incidentally, the agreement came several months after ratification of a new START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) by US President Barack Obama and his Russian counterpart Dmitri Medvedev in 2010. The new START which replaces the lapsed previous treaty, mandates reduction of war heads deployed by each side to its one-third.

As well, a bilateral agreement allowing hassle-free cross-border travel for business executives as well as another one for increased monitoring of American couples who adopt Russian children was signed during the meeting held at the State Department.

Besides, Washington and Moscow reached an agreement for increased cooperation in air traffic control.

The agreements are subject to ratification by lawmakers in both the countries.

http://www.rttnews.com/Content/Policy.aspx?Id=1664952&SM=1

(Return to Articles and Documents List) Washington Post

DHS Plans to Spend $300 Million on Troubled Radiation Detectors By Robert O’Harrow Jr. July 13, 2011

The Department of Homeland Security plans to spend more than $300 million over the next four years on radiation-detection equipment that has not been fully tested and may not work, according to a budget request and an unreleased report by the Government Accountability Office.

The department’s plan is the latest in a series of efforts involving the troubled Advanced Spectroscopic Portal machine, which was touted by the George W. Bush administration as an advanced way to prevent the importation of radioactive materials that could be used in a nuclear or dirty bomb.

In January, the National Academy of Sciences released a report that found there was no way to know whether the machines, known as ASPs, worked as promised. An academy panel found that in promoting the machines to

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/medvedev-sacks-electronic-warfare-chief/817899/

http://www.rttnews.com/Content/Policy.aspx?Id=1664952&SM=1



Congress, the department’s Domestic Nuclear Detection Office had presented its findings “in ways that are incorrect and potentially misleading.”

That report followed the department’s decision to abandon plans to use ASPs for primary screening at ports and borders because of such questions.

Now, the nuclear detection office said it intends to buy up to 400 ASPs by 2016, according the office’s budget request, even though the department has not fulfilled internal requirements to conduct an independent review of the results of ASP testing before buying the equipment, according to the new GAO report.

Homeland security officials responsible for testing and evaluation do not plan to conduct such an independent assessment, the GAO found.

The department had said such assessments would be mandatory for large technology projects, as part of acquisition reforms adopted in response to chronic problems with the ASP program and other high-cost systems.

The GAO said that without such an assessment, the department lacks “the input it needs to determine whether ASP is ready to progress toward production and deployment. This is especially important, given that program’s troubled history.”

Department officials agreed with the GAO on the need for an independent assessment, the report said. But the department told the GAO that it is reviewing the ASP program and that no new tests of the machines have been scheduled, the report said.

“The bottom line is that the ASP program has cost the department five years in the race to strengthen the nation’s domestic defenses against nuclear terrorism,” said Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.), chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, who has long reviewed the program. “At this point, it is critical that the department begin working on a plan B for accelerating improvement in the performance of current generation radiation portal monitors.”

The ASP program was promoted as one of the Bush administration’s top national security efforts. In 2006, Congress approved $1.2 billion for the machines. But GAO investigators and congressional overseers discovered that the nuclear detection office had underestimated the costs, overstated the benefits and provided misleading information to Congress.

Congress required that the homeland security secretary personally certify the effectiveness of the machines before deployment. Preliminary tests of the machines in recent years revealed numerous problems.

In February 2010, Obama administration officials told Lieberman that they had decided to sharply scale back the ASP program because of continuing questions about its costs and performance.

But in February this year, department officials said in a budget document that they intended to use the machines widely for secondary screening. The department said that “between 300 and 400 ASP systems are required to complete the currently planned build-out.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/dhs-plans-to-spend-300-million-on-troubled/2011/07/13/gIQA6gmPDI_story.html

(Return to Articles and Documents List) Military.com

Gen.: SpecOps, Troops Part of Future Deterrence Plan July 14, 2011 By Bryant Jordan, Military.com





Deterrence relying on the nuclear triad of bombers and land- and sea-based missiles is not enough to dissuade potential attackers in the future, said the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. General James Cartwright argued that spec ops troops, conventional forces, and the ability to rapidly deploy both must be part of a new construct.

This is in contrast to the immediate global strike capability that the U.S. currently has: nuclear warheads on intercontinental ballistic missiles, he said.

“We can’t just stay in nuclear and say that’s deterrence,” Marine Gen. James Cartwright told reporters today. “Because there’s so much in the spectrum of conflict that nuclear weapons is just not relevant. The question is, can you portray those forces in such a way that’s convincing that they can do whatever it is we say they can do … and get them to wherever they need to get in a reasonable period of time.”

Cartwright said the U.S. has to redefine deterrence going forward.

With some countries, he said, the historic nuclear triad – which essentially carries with it the guarantee of mutually assured destruction, or MAD – is enough to deter an attack on the U.S.

But MAD is not a one-size-fits-all option, according to Cartwright.

“We need to engender discussion about what deterrence looks like when we get out to 2020/2030,” he said. “If you want deterrence for the 21st century, it ought to be the whole of government, not just kinetic power. You may actually stay with MAD with one country, but not the other because that doesn’t compel us.”

There are also threats from violent extremist groups, non-state actors who are also attempting to get hold of weapons of mass destruction, he said.

“It’s equally threatening so we have to start to think about this a little more holistically,” he said.

That approach also means being able to communicate to with state and non-state actors alike that the U.S. has the ability to take out things that they value or hold dear if they attack.

You have to be able to convince them “that if you want to take this to a fight, you’re not going to win,” he said.

http://www.military.com/news/article/general-specops-troops-part-of-future-deterrence-plan.html

(Return to Articles and Documents List) Space Daily.com

Pentagon Releases Strategy for Cyberspace Agencie France-Presse (AFP) July 14, 2011

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon unveiled its strategy Thursday for defending critical networks and responding to growing threats in cyberspace.

"In the 21st Century, bits and bytes can be as threatening as bullets and bombs," Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn said in a speech accompanying the release of the cyberspace strategy document.

"Keystrokes originating in one country can impact the other side of the globe in the blink of an eye."

The "Department of Defense Strategy for Operating in Cyberspace" calls for the Pentagon to treat cyberspace as an operational domain, like land, air, sea and space.

"Treating cyberspace as a domain means that the military needs to operate and defend its networks, and to organize, train and equip is forces to perform cyber missions," Lynn said at the National Defense University here.

http://www.military.com/news/article/general-specops-troops-part-of-future-deterrence-plan.html



He said the thrust of the strategy was defensive and "it should come as no surprise that the United States is prepared to defend itself."

"Just as our military organizes to defend against hostile acts from land, air and sea, we must also be prepared to respond to hostile acts in cyberspace," Lynn said.

"Accordingly, the United States reserves the right, under the laws of armed conflict, to respond to serious cyber attacks with a proportional and justified military response at the time and place of our choosing," he said.

New Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, in a statement accompanying the release of the strategy document, said it is "critical" that the United States "strengthen our cyber capabilities to address the cyber threats we're facing.

"I view this as an area in which we're going to confront increasing threats in the future and think we have to be better prepared to deal with the growing cyber challenges that will face the nation," Panetta said.

Lynn said information technology has become so important to American military operations that it "virtually guarantees that future adversaries will target our dependence on it.

"Our assessment is that cyber attacks will be a significant component of any future conflict, whether it involves major nations, rogue states, or terrorist groups," he said.

Lynn said US military power served as a deterrent against a cyber attack from a nation state but "if a terrorist group gains disruptive or destructive cyber tools, we have to assume they will strike with little hesitation."

http://www.spacedaily.com/afp/110714185109.og3kwba1.html

(Return to Articles and Documents List) Al Bawaba – Jordan

Al-Qaeda Plot to Overthrow Saudi Regime Foiled July 13th, 2011

Saudi security forces have dismantled an Al-Qaeda-linked cell of 16 people plotting to overthrow the regime, Asharq Alawsat daily reported on Wednesday .The "secret organization" aimed to "gain power with the aid of foreign intelligence services," the London-based daily quoted a spokesman for the justice ministry as saying.

According to the spokesman, Abdullah al-Saadan, the group had contacts with Al-Qaeda in Iraq. A number of its members were detained during a February 2007 meeting in the western port city of Jeddah, he said.

The group, which called itself the "project of the generation," also engaged in collecting funds under the guise of charitable activities, which were in fact destined for "suspicious foreign parties," Saadan said.

http://www.albawaba.com/main-headlines/al-qaeda-plot-overthrow-saudi-regime-foiled-383095

(Return to Articles and Documents List) ABC News.com

Osama Hit List: President Obama, Petraeus, Major U.S. Sporting Event By MARTHA RADDATZ July 15, 2011

U.S. officials say that Osama Bin Laden wanted to assemble a team to attack America on the tenth anniversary of 9/11, and had a hit list that included President Obama, General David Petraeus and a major U.S. sporting event.

The hit list was discovered in the "treasure trove" of information seized from Osama bin Laden's Pakistan compound after the Navy SEAL raid that killed him in May. Officials say he was intent on an attack on the

http://www.spacedaily.com/afp/110714185109.og3kwba1.html

http://www.albawaba.com/main-headlines/al-qaeda-plot-overthrow-saudi-regime-foiled-383095



upcoming 10th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 attacks, though the plot was only in the "discussion phase." He also remained obsessed with using aircraft to kill.

Officials tell ABC News that bin Laden wanted to fly a small plane into a sporting event to cause mass casualties.

"We have so many small airports, you could fly below radar," said Brad Garrett, former FBI special agent and now an ABC News consultant. "That's possibly doable.'

The primary target on bin Laden's hit list was President Obama. Officials tell ABC News that bin Laden was trying to hatch a plan to kill President Obama by shooting down Air Force One or Marine One, the president's plane and helicopter.

Bin Laden hoped to kill General Petraeus, commander of forces in Afghanistan and soon to be CIA director the same way, either in a helicopter or fixed wing airplane with a missile or rocket propelled grenade.

Investigators do not believe the planning got very far, and both President Obama and General Petraeus have countermeasures on their aircraft that would make them tough targets. Said Garrett, "It's difficult, but not impossible, to shoot down either General Petraeus or the president's plane. But the reality is because of the countermeasures and other planes and helicopters in the air, it's not a likely scenario."

Investigators are also learning more about the travels of Bin Laden's couriers from the thumb drives taken from his compound. Over the years, U.S. intelligence has placed a kind of tracking system in some internet cafes in Pakistan, Afghanistan and elsewhere. If someone inserts a thumb drive it will leave a signature on that drive from that internet site. Investigators say they know now some of the places where bin Laden's people went to transfer and receive data across the internet.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/osama-hit-list-president-obama-petraeus-major-us/story?id=14075735

(Return to Articles and Documents List) Defense Professionals OPINION/Analysis July 13, 2011

Iranian Missile Messages: Reading between the Lines of "Great Prophet 6" Arms Control Association (ACA) Volume 2, Issue 10

July 13, 2011 - In light of justifiable concerns about Iran’s potential as a nuclear weapons state, the country’s latest military exercise, ending last week, provided some grounds for qualified relief. Although the official commentary was predictably defiant in tone, the overall choreography and the weapons actually fired bespoke neither the intent nor a current operational capability for Iran to strike at Israel or Europe. The absence in the exercise of systems likely to serve as nuclear weapons delivery vehicles belies contentions that Tehran is moving rapidly to achieve such a capability.

“GREAT PROPHET 6” FIREWORKS

In a ten-day extravaganza of martial events, dubbed “Great Prophet 6,” Iran conducted a prodigious number of missile launches, showcasing a variety of ballistic and cruise missiles, including some new missile types and a newly displayed silo basing mode. The live-fire exercises provided useful training for the troops and stimulated national pride among the population. Such displays of missile prowess also help Iran’s clerical government rally domestic support behind efforts to defy UN sanctions and send a warning message to potential aggressors.

MISSILES ARE THE MEASURE

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/osama-hit-list-president-obama-petraeus-major-us/story?id=14075735



Missiles are the premier weapon of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Iran’s ballistic missiles, in particular, occupy an iconic place in the power pantheon – they are fast to employ, hard for an enemy to locate and attack prior to launch, difficult to intercept in flight, and can potentially serve as a vehicle for delivering nuclear weapons to targets far from the country’s border. Iran already has medium-range ballistic missiles (MRBMs) in its arsenal, which can reach targets not only in neighboring states, but also in Israel. Moreover, given the heavy concentrations of U.S. troops in the region, even Iran’s shorter-range missiles can easily and quickly put the lives of U.S. soldiers at risk.

Anti-shipping cruise missiles – along with mines – provide one of Iran’s most credible deterrent threats, because they enable Tehran to effectively exploit its geographical position by threatening to interrupt maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, which carries a third of all the world's seaborne traded oil. Such a disruption, even short-term, would have incalculable effects on the international economy.

Iranian missile forces loom large in relative significance because of inadequacies in Iran’s air and ground forces. These forces “are sufficient to deter or defend against conventional threats from Iran’s weaker neighbors…but lack the air power and logistical ability to project power much beyond Iran’s borders or to confront regional powers such as Turkey or Israel,” according to a recent official U.S. assessment. [1] U.S. domination of the seas and skies in any military confrontation drives Iran into a disproportionate reliance on threatening to use missiles to level the odds. Even so, the practical utility of Iranian missiles is primarily limited at present to being an instrument of intimidation or terror when targeted against cities, given that Iran’s ballistic missiles lack accuracy against point targets and Iran’s cruise missiles are not suited to land-attack.

By acquiring nuclear warheads for its medium-range ballistic missiles, Iran could gain the ability to destroy specific targets. The deployments of missile defenses in Israel and the Persian Gulf are unlikely to give the defenders confidence that nuclear devastation would be averted in the event of an actual Iranian nuclear missile attack. Moreover, missile defenses are likely to spur rather than retard Iranian efforts to improve their missiles. Fortunately, Tehran would also be aware that its use of nuclear weapons would provoke retaliation that could result in its annihilation as a nation – a risk disproportionate to any conceivable gain.

WHAT DID THE EXERCISE ACTUALLY DEMONSTRATE?

The majority of missiles launched over the course of the exercise were either short-range, battlefield weapons, such as the solid fuel Fateh 110 or cruise missiles, such as the Tondar and Khalije Fars that were claimed to be effective against ships and fixed targets in the Persian Gulf and Gulf of Oman. Of some two dozen missiles fired, only one was a medium-range missile with sufficient power and available space to carry a future nuclear warhead, the liquid fuel Shahab 3, a derivative of North Korea’s No Dong MRBM. Yet the Shahab 3’s range of approximately 1,000 km (with a 750 kg warhead) is not sufficient for it to reach Israel from a secure position in Iran. Iran has developed an advanced version of the Shahab 3, the Ghadr 1, to extend the system's range. This was accomplished by lengthening the airframe, using high-strength aluminum, and changing the shape of the missile’s warhead section. Yet the Ghadr 1 did not appear in the recent exercises.

The Iranian media also displayed, for the first time, underground missile silos, allegedly loaded with liquid fuel Shahabs. However, outside experts doubt the accuracy of the descriptions provided in the video coverage of the exercise and question whether Iran has any MRBMs operationally deployed in silos. In any case, such missiles would be far more likely to survive attack in a mobile basing mode than in fixed silos, which can be located in advance and effectively destroyed with little warning by the precision weapons available to the United States.

Iranian television reported further that Iranian forces had been equipped with a new, long-range radar system, the Ghadir, which was featured in the exercises.

WHAT WAS THE INTENDED MESSAGE?

Based on the statements of Iranian military leaders and reports in Iran’s media, the main messages of “Great Prophet 6” for friends and foe were: that Iran’s strength is increasing in spite of the UN sanctions; that Iran is not



dependent on other nations for its defense; that Iranian missiles could not be effectively preempted or intercepted; and that any attack on Iran would be met with devastating retaliation.

The new radar and missile silos were offered as evidence than Iran cannot be disarmed and that retaliation was inevitable. The salvo launches of missiles were a reminder that missile defenses can be overwhelmed by numbers. The longer-range Shahab 3 symbolized Iran’s reach across the Middle East region, far beyond its own borders. Each of the systems displayed were described as the product of Iranian scientists and engineers, independent of reliance on foreign purchases or technical assistance.

READING BETWEEN THE LINES

There are, however, other conclusions to be drawn from Iran’s flexing of missile muscles. For those seeking to prevent or dissuade Tehran from developing nuclear weapons, the most important question is how much progress the exercises demonstrate toward Iran developing and deploying the missiles, which would carry nuclear warheads.

Realistically, medium-term delivery boils down to two existing systems: the liquid fuel, single stage Ghadr 1 MRBM, an advanced derivative of the Shahab 3, and the solid fuel Sejjil 2 MRBM, a two-stage system with sufficient range to target Israel from launch sites throughout Iran, but not yet operational. Neither missile was flown during “Great Prophet 6.”

The only MRBM launched was announced to be a Shahab 3, an unlikely candidate for fulfilling Iran’s likely nuclear delivery capability aspirations. It is possible that the Iranians foresee using the Ghadr 1 as a nuclear weapons platform, in spite of the disadvantages inherent to liquid fuel mobile missiles – in terms of their limited mobility and greater vulnerability to attack.

It is more likely that the Iranians see the Sejjil 2 as the preferred carrier for a possible future nuclear warhead. Iran is apparently feeling no need to exercise its only operational missile suited for the nuclear mission and the missile best suited for the nuclear mission has not yet reached an operational status appropriate for exercising. Thus, if the U.S. Government is correct in assessing that Tehran has not yet made a decision to build nuclear weapons, there would appear to be time for dissuading it from doing so.

A LONG-RANGE MISSILE THREAT NOT YET IN SIGHT

In a 1999 National Intelligence Estimate, the U.S. intelligence community projected that Iran could test an ICBM within “a few years.” Most analysts predicted back then either “even odds” or a “likely chance” that Iran would test an ICBM by 2010. However, in 2009, senior military and defense officials testified to Congress that shifting from deployment of strategic interceptors to Europe in a third site to a program for deploying theater interceptors in a “Phased Adaptive Approach” was appropriate since the Iranian ICBM threat was evolving more slowly than previously thought.

The Deputy Director of National Intelligence for Analysis reported to Congress in 2011 that Iran was fielding increased numbers of SRBMs and MRBMs, “continuing to work on producing more capable MRBMs, and developing space launch vehicles, which incorporate technology directly applicable to longer-range missile systems.” [2] The still unofficial Report on Sanctions of the UN Panel of Experts completed in May 2011 revealed that the Iranians had conducted two unannounced tests of the Sejjil 2 MRBM (in October 2010 and February 2011) [3] in addition to the five flight tests it had conducted since 2007. (A senior Iranian Republican Guard Corps Commander recently confirmed two previously unannounced “1,900 km-range” missile flights tests in February.)

The Iranians launched their second satellite in May 2011, using the Safir Space Launch Vehicle (SLV) and predicted that it would be followed by another satellite launch in the summer. Unlike the larger Samorgh SLV that had been displayed as a mockup in February, conversion of the Safir SLV to a ballistic missile would still only deliver a nuclear-sized payload about 2,100 km, according to the IISS Strategic Dossier, [4] roughly the same as the Sejjil 2 MRBM.



This summer’s “Great Prophet 6” exercise provides more evidence that, while Tehran makes steady progress on augmenting its stocks of enriched uranium and while R&D work continues on its most likely MRBM candidate for being able to deliver a future nuclear weapon within the region, Tehran’s present military focus is on demonstrating and enhancing its conventional capability to deter and defeat a preventive attack on the Islamic Republic itself. It has not flight-tested, or indeed even asserted a need for, an IRBM or ICBM – the missile categories most relevant to threatening the territories of NATO Europe and the United States.

Notes: 1. Unclassified Report on Military Power of Iran (Congressionally Directed Action), April 2010, p.7 2. Unclassified Report to Congress on the Acquisition of Technology Relating to Weapons of Mass Destruction and Advanced Conventional Munitions, Covering 1 January to 31 December 2010, p.3 3. Panel of Experts Established Pursuant to Resolution 1929 (2010), Final Report, p.26, http://www.innercitypress.com/1929r051711.pdf 4. The International Institute for Strategic Studies: “Iran’s Ballistic Missile Capabilities: A Net Assessment,” May 2010, p.31

http://www.defpro.com/news/details/26253/?SID=1d154ca4f31cab405eb603b6429cf4c6

(Return to Articles and Documents List) The Atlantic OPINION/Politics

How to Shave a Bundle Off the Deficit: Spend Less on Nukes We're planning to spend as much on nuclear weapons in the next decade as we did in the last on the Iraq War. But toward what end? By Joseph Cirincione July 13, 2011

Congress is in the midst of an intense debate over a massive defense spending bill, and budget negotiations between the Administration and congressional leaders are at a pivotal stage. One key part of our nation's budget must be on the table: nuclear weapons.

The government is set to spend almost $700 billion on nuclear weapons over the next 10 years, roughly as much as it spent on the war in Iraq over the decade. Most of the money will be spent without any clear guidance on how many weapons we need and for what purpose. Procurement is racing ahead of policy.

President Obama is struggling to implement the updated nuclear strategy agreed upon by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Department of Defense in last year's Nuclear Posture Review. The administration's plans to reduce the roles and numbers of nuclear weapons have yet to be translated into specific guidance to the military services. This, say officials, will take until the end of this year.

Meanwhile, contracts for new weapons zoom ahead, with Congress set to approve billions in new funding this year. A procurement-policy gap is opening up that threatens to lock in the old nuclear posture for a new generation. As Forbes recently noted, "Barack Obama is likely to spend more money on the U.S. nuclear arsenal than any U.S. president since Ronald Reagan."

Right now, the United States spends about $54 billion each year on nuclear weapons and weapons-related programs. President Obama has pledged to increase the budgets by about $2 billion a year for new bomb factories, plus spend about $12 billion more per year over the next decade to develop a new generation of nuclear-armed missiles, submarines and bombers. Some of these programs are essential. Many are not.

As long as nuclear weapons exist, we will need some to deter nuclear threats from others. But do we need to duplicate the entire nuclear triad for another 50 years?

http://www.defpro.com/news/details/26253/?SID=1d154ca4f31cab405eb603b6429cf4c6



That is the current plan. The Pentagon budget includes funds to develop a new fleet of 12 nuclear-armed submarines with an estimated cost of $110 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Also planned is $55 billion for 100 new bombers, and a new missile to replace the recently upgraded 450 Minutemen III intercontinental ballistic missiles.

Meanwhile, the Department of Energy is planning to add new military capabilities to nearly every warhead in the active nuclear stockpile, with programs stretching beyond 2030. The department will spend over $85 billion over the next ten years on these programs, plus construction of new facilities.

All these cost estimates are likely to rise. The price of the Navy sub, for example, nearly doubled in three years and defense officials are struggling to bring it back down. Typically, contractors and military services low-ball initial estimates to win program approval. Once budgets are locked in, programs build constituent support, thwarting cancellation even as costs double or triple.

How does this spiraling spending square with military plans, as stated in the nuclear review, to "better align our nuclear policies and posture to our most urgent priorities"? The Navy subs alone would be able to carry roughly 800 nuclear bombs through the middle of the century. Are we putting our money where the threats are?

Spending on weapons designed to fight last century's conflict drains funds from weapons needed for today's challenges. The services already feel the nuclear budget burden. In 2009, the Navy said it would have to cut 56 vessels from its shipbuilding budget in order to afford the 12 new nuclear-armed subs. The Navy recognizes the problem, but does not have a solution.

This is where Congress comes in. Members should not approve any of these new programs without a nuclear roadmap.

The consensus among military officials and bipartisan security experts is that nuclear reductions enhance U.S. national security. As the Nuclear Posture Review says, "Our most pressing security challenge at present is preventing nuclear proliferation and nuclear terrorism, for which a nuclear force of thousands of weapons has little relevance."

Former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and former Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov recommend that the U.S. and Russia reduce from the current 1,550 strategic warheads each side can deploy to no more than 1,000. This could save billions annually. In 2006, Steven Kosiak, now at the Office of Management and Budget, estimated that the United States could sustain an arsenal of this size for one-third the current annual cost.

Does the administration agree? Or does it have a different plan? Congress needs updated studies on potential savings and all projected costs. Only then can it rationally choose whether to save funds by reducing arsenals or increase funds to maintain the current force indefinitely.

Joseph Cirincione is president of Ploughshares Fund, a global security foundation. He is the author of Bomb Scare: The History and Future of Nuclear Weapons.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/07/how-to-shave-a-bundle-off-the-deficit-spend-less-on-nukes/241844/

(Return to Articles and Documents List) The Australian – Australia OPINION

Good Reasons Not to Trust Iran July 14, 2011

ON June 8, the head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation, Fereydoun Abbasi Davani, announced plans to triple Iran's capacity to produce 20 per cent enriched uranium, transferring enrichment from Natanz to the Fordo plant.





Inside Iran, this announcement by a discredited regime drew little comment and was quickly overshadowed by the domestic political theatre of the latest high-profile tussles between Supreme Leader Sayyid Ali Khamenei and President Mahmoud Ahmadinjedad. But it was an important statement because it makes even clearer that Iran's program is not designed for purely peaceful purposes.

Iran has one civilian nuclear power station and is seeking to build more. These power stations need uranium enriched to about 3.5 per cent for fuel. So plans to enrich it any further rightly prompt questions.

Uranium enriched by up to 20 per cent does have some civilian uses. But not in the civilian nuclear power stations that Iran claims to desire. Predominantly, it is used as fuel for research reactors, producing, among other things, isotopes for medical use. These are very efficient: one research reactor in Belgium is capable of producing almost all the medical isotopes needed across the whole of Western Europe.

Iran has one research reactor. The plans announced by Davani would provide more than four times its annual fuel requirements. Yet this reactor is already capable of producing enough radio isotopes for up to a million medical investigations per year, already comparable to Britain and much more than Iran needs.

The plan would also require diverting at least half of Iran's current annual output of 3.5 per cent enriched uranium, and so deny it to Iran's nuclear power stations.

If Iran is serious about developing civil nuclear energy, why divert limited materials and resources away from the civil energy program while spurning offers from the outside world - including the E3+3 countries of Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the US - of technological assistance for Iran's peaceful use of nuclear energy?

There is one clear purpose for this enriched uranium. Enrichment from natural uranium to 20 per cent is the most time-consuming and resource-intensive step in making the highly enriched uranium required for a nuclear weapon.

And when enough 20 per cent enriched uranium is accumulated at the underground facility at Qom, it would take only two or three months of additional work to convert this into weapons-grade material. There would remain technical challenges to actually producing a bomb, but Iran would be a significant step closer.

Iran's intensified uranium enrichment is envisaged to take place at a previously covert site, buried deep beneath the mountains. That it claims to allow IAEA monitoring is not a safeguard at the current time.

Iran has a persistent record of evasion and obfuscation with the International Atomic Energy Agency. It has failed to provide the IAEA with access to relevant locations, equipment, persons or documents. It has not replied to questions from the IAEA on its procurement of nuclear related items and aspects of its work that could only be useful for developing a nuclear weapon - such as multipoint detonation for the initiation of hemispherical explosive charges or, in plain English, detonators for an atom bomb.

It has an active ballistic missile program, including the development of missiles with a range of more than 1000km and carried out a range of missile tests in June. A reasonable observer cannot help but join the dots.

This is not an abstract issue: Iran's nuclear program could lead to a nuclear arms race in the Middle East, already the world's most volatile region. It would be both naive and a derogation of duty to give them once again the benefit of the doubt.

This is why there are already six UN Security Council Resolutions that require Iran to suspend enrichment immediately, all ignored by Iran. Iran has so far refused to enter into any negotiations on its nuclear program until the E3+3 agreed to lift all sanctions and immediately recognise Iran's right to enrich.

But there will remain no rationale for lifting sanctions until Iran engages in negotiations to address what are well founded concerns about its nuclear program. So far, it has done the opposite.



This latest revelation demonstrates the urgency of increasing pressure. Britain is prepared to take action: I have agreed a further 100 designations to add to EU sanctions last month, and last week announced extra travel bans against known proliferators.

William Hague is the British Foreign Secretary

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/good-reasons-not-to-trust-iran/story-e6frg6so-1226094146149

(Return to Articles and Documents List) Global Security Newswire OPINION/Analysis

Iran Could Spread Nuclear Arms to Extremists: Expert Thursday, July 14, 2011 By Diane Barnes, Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON – Iran’s web of connections with outside organizations heighten the potential for the nation to acquire or distribute nuclear-weapon technology, a former veteran U.S. nonproliferation official warned on Wednesday (see GSN, July 13).

Violent extremists could be among those to benefit from a relationship with a nuclear-armed Iran, according to Christopher Ford, who most recently served as U.S. special representative for nuclear nonproliferation.

“Given the scope and depth of Iran’s involvement in international terrorist groups, I think terrorist acquisition of [nuclear] weapons, material and technology could come about either deliberately or inadvertently, “ he said at a Hudson Institute event here. “One can’t rule out, of course, the possibility of transfers occurring without top-level authorization.”

The United States and its allies have for years aired their belief that Iran is seeking a nuclear arms capability. In testimony to Congress earlier this year, U.S. National Intelligence Director James Clapper said Iran might be able to produce enough weapon-grade uranium for a bomb "in the next few years" (see GSN, Feb. 17).

Tehran has maintained its nuclear program is intended strictly for atomic energy production and other civilian endeavors. The nation’s nuclear efforts remain under investigation by the International Atomic Energy Agency, which recently said it had information that Iran pursued development of an advanced system suited only for initiating nuclear-bomb detonations (see GSN, May 25).

Tehran has also been identified as one of the customers of the nuclear proliferation ring once led by top Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan.

“Iran has developed a rich network of black- and gray-market ties around the world for the acquisition of nuclear-related technology,” including “remnants” of the Khan network and Russian scientists who might have helped Tehran to access nuclear detonator technology, said Ford, who now directs the Hudson Institute's Center for Technology and Global Security.

Ford pointed to a 2007 U.S. intelligence report’s statement that “Iran probably has imported at least some weapons-usable fissile material” as another example of the potency of the Iranian nuclear network. Elements of the report, which asserted that Iran’s formal nuclear-weapon activities had been shuttered several years earlier, are now viewed skeptically in Washington and other capitals.

“This ‘spider web’ of international contacts and transnational relationships for the acquisition and trading in nuclear technology is one that sort of co-exists -- overlaps, in a sense -- in Iran, with its own extensive network of terrorist ties,” Ford said.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/good-reasons-not-to-trust-iran/story-e6frg6so-1226094146149



“You can’t rule out some kind of contact or cross-pollination between them,” he added. “This is also a concern that is very much in the minds … of leaders in the West and elsewhere.”

If Iran opted to build a nuclear bomb based on a previously vetted design, it might deem the resulting weapon to have sufficient deterrent value without a test detonation to verify it functioned as intended, Ford suggested.

News reports have indicated “the Khan network was in the business of handing out [Chinese nuclear-weapon] design information to one or more of its clients around the world. There’s widespread suspicion the Iranians have gotten some of this as well,” he said.

“If the reports are to be believed, there is in some sense a set of what you may call “pretested” designs floating around out there,” according to Ford. “And if you should happen to have a delivery system that is capable of delivering those particular devices, then it’s in a sense your call how confident your engineers wish you to be. It’s not a given that we understand from the outside the precise degree of certainty that would be required for Iranian purposes.”

Former IAEA safeguards chief Olli Heinonen echoed Ford’s warning during the panel discussion.

“Today, I’m not so sure that you need” to conduct a nuclear test to ensure that the device functions as intended, he said. “I don’t think there’s an easy answer, but I would not start to wait for a nuclear test.”

“There is still time” to negotiate with the Middle Eastern state on the issue, added Heinonen, who said an effective verification regime must begin with a “clean table” in which a country’s past activities are known.

Heinonen urged U.N. Security Council nations to “step up pressure on *U.N.+ member states” to disclose additional detail on “current and past proliferation activities related to Iran’s atomic activities,” and to pursue measures aimed at further bolstering the country’s economic isolation.

Iran and North Korea appear to have exchanged ballistic missile technology, according to an expert analysis prepared recently for the U.N. Security Council (see GSN, May 16). Tehran has rebuffed the allegation (see GSN, May 17).

A successful Iranian effort to acquire a nuclear weapons capability could force Washington and other governments into a “mitigation” effort to contain the nation’s influence and preserve the wider nonproliferation regime, Ford said.

“Flouting nonproliferation obligations as Iran has done needs to be seen by essentially anyone in the future [as a path+ not to a country’s geostrategic rise, but rather to a squalid and dangerous future of economic impoverishment, diplomatic isolation and worsened military and regime change pressures,” he argued.

http://www.globalsecuritynewswire.org/gsn/ts_20110714_5862.php

(Return to Articles and Documents List) Washington Post OPINION

Panetta’s Challenge: China’s and Iran’s Weapons Programs By Andrew F. Krepinevich July 14, 2011

Leon Panetta has begun his tenure as secretary of defense with big challenges to manage — conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya, and looming cuts in defense spending — and two clouds on the national security horizon he knows he cannot ignore.

These threatening developments are in regions long considered to be of vital interest to the United States: the Western Pacific and the Persian Gulf. They will be difficult, if not impossible, to reverse.

http://www.globalsecuritynewswire.org/gsn/ts_20110714_5862.php



One concerns the U.S. military’s loss of its near-monopoly in precision-guided munitions, or “smart bombs.” China is fielding precision-guided ballistic and cruise missiles in increasing numbers. Their principal purpose appears to be threatening the major U.S. air bases in the Western Pacific, such as the one at Kadena on the Japanese island of Okinawa. China is also equipping its air force and navy with high-speed anti-ship cruise missiles capable of overwhelming the U.S. Navy’s carrier defenses, and it is developing a new anti-ship ballistic missile, the DF-21.

Beijing believes the U.S. military has an Achilles’ heel: its “nervous system” of battle networks. Without its satellite and fiber-optic data links, the U.S. ability to coordinate forces, target the enemy, guide weapons to their targets and maintain control over unmanned drones such as the Predator would be severely compromised. The People’s Liberation Army has in recent years fielded and tested anti-satellite lasers and rockets, and it is suspected of probing U.S. defenses with its cyber-weapons. This has led to concerns that the opening moves of a future major conflict would be against America’s information system. As Panetta put it at his confirmation hearing last month: “The next Pearl Harbor that we face could well be a cyber attack.”

Does China want war with the United States? Almost certainly not. What China does want, apparently, is to shift the military balance in the Western Pacific so that the United States will not be able to provide credible military support to longtime security partners such as Japan, South Korea and Taiwan.

We had a word for this phenomenon during the Cold War: Finlandization. Then, the United States sought to maintain a stable military balance with the Soviet Union. One reason was that if the balance shifted in Moscow’s favor, America’s European allies might conclude that Moscow could not be resisted and would fall under Soviet sway. All of Europe would share the fate of Finland, which remained nominally independent after World War II but abided by foreign policy rules dictated in Moscow.

The second concern is Iran, which, like Beijing, is buying into the precision-guided weapons revolution. Its “poor man’s” version of China’s arsenal includes long-range ballistic missiles, supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles, smart anti-ship mines and fast attack boats to “swarm” enemy ships. The apparent goal is to turn the Persian Gulf’s constricted waters, through which 40 percent of the world’s oil shipping passes, into an Iranian lake. This challenge is compounded by Iran’s efforts to acquire a nuclear capability, which may encourage it to become more aggressive in its efforts to undermine regional security.

If Iran becomes a nuclear power, the pressure on Saudi Arabia and Turkey to follow suit might be irresistible. With ballistic missile flight times between Iran and Israel less than 10 minutes, warning capability evaporates, greatly increasing the incentive to strike first in a crisis. In these circumstances, regional stability would be severely undermined. While much thought recently has been given to achieving a world without nuclear weapons, more serious consideration should be given to how to prevent — or terminate — a “limited” nuclear war in the Middle East.

If the United States fails to respond to these challenges, the strategically vital Persian Gulf and major parts of the Western Pacific will become “no-go” zones for the U.S. military — areas where the risks of operating are prohibitively high.

The U.S. military is likely to confront these growing challenges with significantly diminished resources. The Pentagon budget is projected to be cut by $400 billion, and perhaps quite a bit more, over the next decade as Washington struggles to get its fiscal house in order. Wisely, both Panetta and his predecessor, Robert Gates, have declared that any budget cuts must be informed by a well-crafted strategy, and the Pentagon is working to craft one. A crucial test will be how well it addresses these rapidly growing risks.

Andrew Krepinevich is president of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments and author of “7 Deadly Scenarios: A Military Futurist Explores War in the 21st Century.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/panettas-challenge-chinas-and-irans-weapons-programs/2011/07/12/gIQAinvxEI_story.html





(Return to Articles and Documents List)