USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies (CUWS) Outreach Journal

CUWS Outreach Journal 30 July 2015

Feature Item: “Nuclear Weapons Sustainment: Improvements Made to Budget Estimates, but Opportunities Exist to Further Enhance Transparency.” Authored by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO); GAO-15-536: Published: July 30, 2015; publicly released: July 30, 2015, 47 pages. http://www.gao.gov/assets/680/671788.pdf The annual joint report submitted by the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Department of Energy (DOE) in May 2014 includes 10-year budget estimates for sustaining and modernizing U.S. nuclear weapons (see figure), and these estimates are generally consistent with internal funding and modernization plans, with a few exceptions. For example, GAO could not fully verify that DOD's command, control, and communications estimates were consistent with its internal funding plans, because DOD did not document methodological assumptions and limitations associated with these estimates as GAO had previously recommended. Similarly, DOE's estimates are generally consistent with its internal plans, with two exceptions; for example, the budget estimate for the first five years of the cruise missile warhead life extension program is lower than the cost range in DOE's internal plans.

U.S. Nuclear Weapons Air Force puts 4-Star General in Charge of Nukes for First Time since Cold War At Loose End: Pentagon Racking Its Brains Over US ICBM Basing Mode Cost of US Nuclear Delivery Systems Soared 40% in a Single Year

U.S. Counter-WMD Russia Launches Cutting-Edge Spy Ship to Track U.S. Missile Defense Putin Blames US for 'Spiral of Arms Race' Russia Makes Proportionate Response to Missile Defense in Europe — Defense Ministry

U.S. Arms Control Putin: Russia's Strategic Defense Actions Comply with Int'l Commitments US, Russia Should Have Diplomatic Dialogue on INF Treaty - CRS

Homeland Security/The Americas USAF Chief Engineer: Directed Energy for Missile Defense 'At Tipping Point' Strategic Command Focused on Hypersonic Missile Threat

Asia/Pacific N.K. Building High Explosives Assembly Facility for Nuclear Weapons at Yongbyon: 38 North North Korea Marks Korean War Anniversary with Threat to 'Leave No Americans Alive' North Korea Will Not Give Up Nuclear Weapons Unilaterally — Ambassador North Korea May Conduct Nuclear Tests in October — Deputy UN Envoy N. Korea Completes Upgrade of Rocket Site, shows No Signs of Launch Preparations yet Scud Missiles Fired into Saudi Arabia from Yemen Traced to N.Korea: Official N. Korean Leader Inspects 'War Drills' against U.S., S. Korea

Europe/Russia Russia to Build 5th-Gen. Nuclear Subs by 2020 in Push to Modernize Military Russia Not Planning to Deploy Tu-22M3 Bomber in Crimea Live-Firing of Iskander-M Tactical Missiles Completed near Russia's Orenburg Tu-160M2 to Have New Avionics That Will Increase Its Effectiveness Twofold Russia to Deliver Modernized Version of S-300 Air Defense System to Iran

Middle East Zarif Reacts to Kerry’s Senate Hearing Remarks IRGC Deputy Top Commander: US Unable to Take Slightest Hostile Move against Iran Iran Nuclear: Media Ordered to Be Positive about Deal Araqchi Clarifies “Reversibility” of JCPOA Commitments for Iran UN Agency May Allow Iran to Gather Soil Samples at Alleged Nuclear Site Kerry Warns of Consequences if Congress Rejects Iran Nuclear Deal Leader's Aide: UNSC Resolution on Iran's Defensive Capabilities Unacceptable Verification of Iran N-Program Depends on Secret Agreement with IAEA Saudi Arabia to Buy 600 Patriot Missiles for $5.4 bn DoD to Congress: Iran Deal or No, Military Options Open Iran Rejects Report of Confidential Annexes to JCPOA

India/Pakistan Pakistan to Buy 8 Submarines, the Biggest Arms Export Deal for China

Africa

Commentary Commentary: Vienna Deal is Best Way to Keep Iran from Getting Nuclear Weapons ‘Peace for Our Time’ The Most Dangerous Nuclear Weapon in America's Arsenal Are America's Long-Range Ballistic Missiles Doomed?

Return to Top

Alaska Dispatch News – Anchorage, AK Air Force puts 4-Star General in Charge of Nukes for First Time since Cold War Robert Burns, Associated Press (AP) July 27, 2015 WASHINGTON — Working to reinvigorate its nuclear force after years of missteps and scandal, the Air Force is putting a four-star general in charge for the first time in the post-Cold War era. His mission: Restore institutional muscle and assert more influence on the force's behalf. "Having a four-star in charge of this command will be crucial," Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James said in an interview, "because rank matters." Gen. Robin Rand, a career fighter pilot, will take over Tuesday as commander of Air Force Global Strike Command, replacing Lt. Gen. Stephen Wilson. Rand has never served in the nuclear force, but he has broad experience in the Air Force, most recently as commander of the organization in charge of all recruiting, technical training and professional military education. He steps in amid optimism in the Air Force that it has put its nuclear force back on track. A series of Associated Press reports revealed that the force had atrophied and morale had suffered, in part because of a lack of resources as other arms of the service prevailed in competition for dollars and power. Elevating the Air Force nuclear bomber and missile command to four-star rank was among the recommendations last fall by an independent panel that studied the root cause of slip-ups, particularly within the organization that operates and manages the Air Force's 450 Minuteman 3 intercontinental ballistic missiles, or ICBMs, at bases in Montana, Wyoming and North Dakota. The study was undertaken on orders from Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel in response to the AP reports starting in May 2013 that documented evidence of low morale, weak discipline and training gaps. Hagel ordered top-to-bottom changes and pledged $8 billion in new investment over five years. He endorsed the independent study's conclusion that having a three-star run the nuclear force was a mistake. "There is no substitute for" four-star influence, the study said, adding that relegating the nuclear command to lower rank sent a "less-than-desirable message to the airmen performing the mission." The days of having a four-star nuclear command ended at the close of the Cold War when the U.S. dismantled Strategic Air Command, the Air Force's strategic bombers were reassigned to Air Combat Command and the ICBM fleet was given to Air Force Space Command. A shocking mishandling of nuclear weapons at a bomber base in 2007 brought reforms that led to creation of Air Force Global Strike Command, the organization that Rand will now lead. The command manages the Air Force's nuclear force, but the military's nuclear war-fighting group is U.S. Strategic Command, headed by a four-star admiral. It also has other responsibilities including cyber and missile defense. Virtually the entire nuclear Air Force chain of command has been overturned since the AP disclosed in May 2013 an internal Air Force email lamenting "rot" inside the ICBM force. The note's author was Lt. Col. Jay Folds. He was reacting in part to training and disciplinary breakdowns at the Minuteman 3 wing at Minot Air Force Base that prompted the Air Force to suspend 17 launch officers, an unprecedented action that came to light only through the leaking of Folds' email. Folds is now a full colonel and recently became the No. 2 commander at the 341st Missile Wing at Malmstrom Air Force Base in Montana. Rand, a 1979 graduate of the Air Force Academy, has run the Education and Training Command since October 2013. Before that he headed the Air Force component of U.S. Southern Command, and he commanded the Air Force's main fighter wing in Iraq in 2006-07. He declined to be interviewed for this article. His lack of nuclear experience is not a worry, said Air Force Secretary James. "I think he's just the ticket," she said. "The No. 1 thing this community needs is it needs a fantastic leader, an inspirational leader." "It would have been great if he also had the nuclear experience, but in this case we didn't have somebody immediately in the wings who was ready to take that on at that level, who had that experience." Tony Carr, a retired Air Force officer who is studying law at Harvard, says putting a non-nuclear officer in charge can serve as a check against complacency. "Elevation of the position to a four-star billet is even more remarkable," he said. "This reflects the Air Force's acknowledgement that institutional neglect is a special risk in this community. A four- star's access and presence at the highest level of resource allocation and policy collaboration is an insurance policy against that neglect." James and other senior Air Force officials say they are confident that the ICBM force has been jolted out of its doldrums and its era of decline. "The actions we've taken over the last 18 months are moving us in the right direction," Maj. Gen. Jack Weinstein, commander of all three ICBM wings, said in late June. https://www.adn.com/article/20150727/air-force-puts-4-star-general-charge-nukes-first-time- cold-war Return to Top

Sputnik International – Russian Information Agency At Loose End: Pentagon Racking Its Brains Over US ICBM Basing Mode While the question of upgrading the US nuclear triad arises, the Pentagon is still racking its brains over the most cost-effective option for ICBM basing, American writer Steve Weintz emphasizes. 29 July 2015 If the US Armed Forces plans to keep its ICBM (Intercontinental Ballistic Missile) force it should find an appropriate basing mode for it, American writer and filmmaker Steve Weintz explained. "By 1964, ICBMs made up the bulk of the US strategic force… To be credible, a first-strike weapon had to be invulnerable, otherwise the "use-it-or-lose-it" dilemma resurfaced. So began a decades-long quest for an invulnerable basing mode that ended with the fall of the enemy it was designed to defend against," the writer pointed out. While seeking the most cost-effective option for its ICBM basing, US defense contractors considered over thirty different options between 1964 and 1979, ranging from orbital basing to placing ICBMs on commercial trains. One of the concepts, dubbed Orca, proposed to encapsulate ICBMs and place them on the ocean floor. However, "as with orbital basing, treaties prevent the deployment of nukes on the ocean floor, and inspection would be detectable," Weintz remarked. "Several basing ideas envisioned large carrier aircraft disgorging their ICBMs in flight. Launching an ICBM in mid-air sounds crazy, but it worked in tests… Even giant seaplanes and zeppelins were considered for the carrier role," the writer elaborated. While air-basing options proved very costly, the Pentagon focused on land basing — a mode essential for the nuclear triad concept. The "Sandy Silo" plan envisioned the encapsulated missile placed in a 2,000-foot-deep pit filled with sand. In accordance with the plan water would have fluidized the sand and the missile would shoot to the surface. Alas, there was a great risk that the sand would turn into glass first while the water would boil away. But that is not all: "the wackiest concepts" involved moving ICBMs "a lot" making them hard to target and destroy by the US' potential adversaries. So far, "several transporter-erector-launcher (TEL) designs looked to trundle ICBMs along highways and across open terrain," Weintz narrated. Commenting on the Pentagon's vain attempts to find the most effective basing mode for the country's most advanced strategic weapons, Weintz paraphrased famous American writer Theodor Seuss Geisel, also known as Dr. Seuss: "Could they put it in a boat? Could they even make it float? Or maybe put it on a train, underground, away from rain." While other countries developing their strategic ballistic weapons, ICBMs are struggling to keep their place in the US arsenal. "If the USAF wants to keep its ICBM force, it must find a basing mode that works," Weintz stressed. http://sputniknews.com/military/20150729/1025189635.html Return to Top

Sputnik International – Russian Information Agency Cost of US Nuclear Delivery Systems Soared 40% in a Single Year The amount of money spent on US nuclear delivery systems soared by 40 percent in 2014 over the previous year, a GAO report says. 31 July 2015 WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — The amount of money spent on US nuclear delivery systems soared by 40 percent in 2014 over the previous year, and the US nuclear complex now costs $300 billion per year to maintain, a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report said. “[The Department of Defense]’s estimates for nuclear delivery systems increased by about 40 percent from [the 2013] report, due in part to changes in the methodologies used to develop them,” the report, which was released on Thursday, said. The GAO noted that the total cost of the US government‘s military and civilian nuclear programs combined amounted to $298.1 billion in Fiscal Year 2014. That figure was comprised of $100.1 billion spent on maintaining the US nuclear stockpile and its security, $163.4 billion on nuclear delivery systems and $34.6 billion spent on the command, control and communications (C3) systems of the strategic force, the report said. The C3 expenditures also covered “the nuclear command and control system, which includes early warning radars, aircraft and communications networks, and… delivery systems,” the report explained. US strategic nuclear delivery systems consist of a variety of platforms such as heavy bombers, air- launched cruise missiles and ballistic-missile submarines, the report stated. The US Government Accountability Office is an independent, nonpartisan agency that works for Congress and investigates how the federal government spends taxpayer dollars. http://sputniknews.com/military/20150731/1025239069.html Return to Top

The Moscow Times – Moscow, Russia Russia Launches Cutting-Edge Spy Ship to Track U.S. Missile Defense By Matthew Bodner July 26, 2015 Russia inducted a new-generation spy ship into the Northern Fleet on Sunday during navy day celebrations. The new vessel will be tasked with monitoring U.S. anti-missile defenses on the high seas, a navy spokesman said. The ship is known as the Yury Ivanov, the lead boat of the Project 18280 intelligence ships designed for the Russian navy. A second vessel of the same class will be launched next year, according to the United Shipbuilding Corporation, news agency RIA Novosti reported last week. The ship was commissioned into the Russian navy during a large naval parade attended by President Vladimir Putin in Russia’s Baltic Sea enclave of Kaliningrad on Sunday. Light on armaments, heavy on sensors and advanced electronic equipment, spy ships are purpose- built to loiter and listen to what foreign vessels are up to. The Yury Ivanov will be specifically equipped to track U.S. anti-missile defenses, which are being outfitted on American warships. Each of Russia’s four major fleets has one or two spy ships in their ranks, but these were built in the 1980s and are ill-equipped to counter the newer U.S. vessels. Each fleet is expected to receive an Ivanov-class ship over the next several years. U.S. missile defenses have repeatedly caused friction in U.S.-Russia relations. Moscow considers the defenses an existential threat to its nuclear deterrence, which the Defense Ministry sees as its strongest guarantor of national security. The U.S. is pursuing a sea-based missile defense strategy that will see the number of vessels fitted with Aegis anti-missile defense systems expand from 33 to 48 by the end of the 2020 fiscal year, according to a report issued by the Congressional Research Service last month. Military planners in Moscow are making sure they can keep tabs on them. “They are really paranoid about U.S. missile defenses being aimed at Russia, not Iran or North Korea,” said Dr. Dmitry Gorenburg, a Russian naval expert at the Virginia-based CNA think tank. “So they want to observe [those deployments].” Russian plans to pick holes if the U.S. missile defense shield goes beyond new ships. Moscow is working on several new classes of intercontinental ballistic missiles equipped with multiple nuclear warheads and countermeasures specifically designed to confuse and evade U.S. defenses in the event of a nuclear shooting war. The Ivanov has been promoted in the Russian media as another tool in Russia’s arsenal aimed at thwarting U.S. missile defenses, but the equipment required to track the U.S. system’s deployment allows the vessel to perform other standard functions of a spy ship. These tasks include serving as a communications hub for naval fleets, conducting electronic warfare — a high-tech aspect of modern war that focuses on blasting the air with electronic noise to confuse enemy sensors, jam communications and make it harder for the opponent to locate your own forces. A spy ship also serves to gather intelligence on enemy electronic warfare capabilities, as well as listen to radio and other electronic signals emitted by foreign military forces. Russia’s navy has been a key focus of Putin’s military modernization efforts, but two decades of decay following the collapse of the Soviet Union have seen its strength deteriorate significantly. No longer a major force on the high seas, the Russian navy has been mostly relegated to coastal defense. According to Gorenburg, the Ivanov and its sister ship “will be used as intel ships for a variety of missions, they have a long range and deployment time so that can go out and observe U.S. weapons testing or naval exercises, or even monitor communications offshore somewhere.” The Ivanov isn’t a large ship, displacing over 4,000 tons with a crew of 120 men — similar in size to a frigate-type escort ship. http://www.themoscowtimes.com/business/article/russia-launches-cutting-edge-spy-ship-to- track-u-s-missile-defense/526248.html Return to Top

Press TV – Tehran, Iran Putin Blames US for 'Spiral of Arms Race' Tuesday, July 28, 2015 Russian President Vladimir Putin has blamed the United States for the current round of arms race in the world. "This new spiral of the arms race was prompted by the United States’ unilateral withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty,” Putin said in an interview with Swiss broadcaster RTS on Monday. On December 13, 2001, Washington withdrew from the treaty, which had been signed in 1972 between the US and the Soviet Union, on the limitation of the anti-ballistic missile systems used in defending areas against ballistic missile-delivered nuclear weapons. “This treaty was a cornerstone of the entire system of international security," he said. According to a report by the International Institute for Strategic Studies, a leading think-tank focusing on international security, Washington in 2014 spent USD 581 billion, the highest amount of military expenditure last year. China, Saudi Arabia and Russia are the countries coming after the US with USD 129, 81 and 70 billion in military expenditure respectively, the British institute's report said. Putin also said that US official should rethink their policies and stop “acting in a way ‘who-in-not- with-us-is-against-us.’” "Undoubtedly, the United States is a great power. But it doesn’t mean that the current US authorities have any right to move around the world, seizing people and taking them to their prisons,” he added. Elsewhere in the interview, the Russian president said that Moscow is ready to negotiate with the US and Europe on a host of issues including the situation in Ukraine. “Russia takes no interest in seeking confrontation with other countries. But sometimes we simply have to defend our interests. And we will undoubtedly do it, but not in a confrontational manner but thorough finding compromises and mutually acceptable solutions,” he said. The US and its European allies have imposed economic sanctions on Russia, accusing Moscow of being involved in the Ukrainian conflict that broke out last year. Russia has repeatedly denied the accusation and has imposed retaliatory sanctions against many Western countries. http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/07/28/422164/Russia-US-Putin-RTS-arms-race Return to Top

TASS Russian News Agency – Moscow, Russia Russia Makes Proportionate Response to Missile Defense in Europe — Defense Ministry Russia's Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov said his worst suspicions regarding what country US missile defense was aimed against had been confirmed July 30, 2015 MOSCOW, July 30. /TASS/. Russia is taking proportionate military and technical measures in response to the missile defense system the United States is creating in Europe, Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov said on Thursday. "All decisions will be made, if and when there emerges a threat to Russia’s national security (from the US missile defense in Europe)," Antonov said. He recalled that Iran’s nuclear problem had been settled, but "no statements the United States is terminating the creation of a missile defense in Europe have followed." "This confirms our worst suspicions regarding what country these plans are targeted against in reality," Antonov said. Russia’s modern missile systems to counter US missile defense Head of the 4th department of the Central Research Institute of the Russian Defense Ministry Colonel Oleg Pyshny said last week that Russia’s modern missile systems are based on the technology solutions that will enable them to counter the US missile defense system. "Indeed, we are closely monitoring the situation with the creation of the US missile defense systems, including those being deployed to Europe. We are aware of the program for the development of the SM-3 family of antimissiles. We believe that over time these missiles will be upgraded with systems that will pose a threat to us," Pyshny said. He said all the threats are taken into account in the development of Russia’s missile systems. "Our modern missile systems are based on the technology solutions needed to counter these missile defense systems," the official said. http://tass.ru/en/russia/811648 Return to Top

Sputnik International – Russian Information Agency Putin: Russia's Strategic Defense Actions Comply with Int'l Commitments Vladimir Putin says Russia's actions in the area of strategic defense fully comply with its international commitments. 27 July 2015 MOSCOW (Sputnik) — Russia's actions in the area of strategic defense fully comply with its international commitments, including in the framework of the New START treaty with the United States, President Vladimir Putin said. "All our actions in the sphere of strategic defense are in full compliance with Russia's international commitments, including in the framework of the treaty with the United States on strategic weapons," Putin said in an interview with Swiss media posted on the Kremlin's website. In June, Putin stated Russia will reinforce its nuclear potential in 2015 by adding more than 40 new intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM) capable of penetrating the most technically-advanced missile defense systems. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg and US Secretary of State John Kerry expressed their concerns about Russia’s plans. Under the 2010 New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), Russia and the United States agreed to limit the number of ballistic missiles and heavy bombers equipped with nuclear warheads to 700 and nuclear warheads to 1,550 by February 2018. http://sputniknews.com/military/20150727/1025109135.html Return to Top

Sputnik International – Russian Information Agency US, Russia Should Have Diplomatic Dialogue on INF Treaty - CRS Congressional Research Service Nuclear Weapons Policy Specialist Amy Woolf claims that the United States and Russia should have diplomatic discussions to solve their concerns regarding alleged violations of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces INF Treaty. 28 July 2015 WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — The United States and Russia should have diplomatic discussions to solve their concerns regarding alleged violations of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces INF Treaty, Congressional Research Service Nuclear Weapons Policy Specialist Amy Woolf told Sputnik. “The [US] administration has said it would like Russia to engage diplomatically and return to compliance with the Treaty,” Woolf said on Monday. Russia previously stated it was open and ready to continue consultations with the United States as soon as Washington explains its accusations against Moscow about alleged INF Treaty violations. “Then there should be a diplomatic dialogue on this,” Woolf stated. Both the United States and Russia have levelled mutual accusations that each side has violated the INF Treaty. In July 2014, the United States accused Russia of not complying with the Cold War-era treaty by testing a ground-launched cruise missile. Russia has repeatedly requested specific information from the US State Department to prove Moscow’s alleged violations. The United States claims it has handed over all the needed information regarding its concerns. But in June 2015, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that Washington has still not specified in what way Russia has allegedly breached the INF Treaty. The Russian Foreign Ministry dismissed the US accusations, pointing to reported violations of the INF Treaty that the United States has done by placing missile defense launchers in Poland and Romania. The INF Treaty, signed by the United States and the then Soviet Union in 1987, bans nuclear and conventional ground-based cruise and ballistic missiles with a range of 500-5,500 kilometres (300- 3,400 miles). http://sputniknews.com/us/20150728/1025111318.html#ixzz3hC26HEgl Return to Top

Sputnik International – Russian Information Agency USAF Chief Engineer: Directed Energy for Missile Defense 'At Tipping Point' US Air Force Directed Energy Research Lab Chief Engineer Dr. Kelly Hammett claims that directed energy technology for missile defense is reaching a decisive point for future applications. 29 July 2015 WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — Directed energy technology for missile defense is reaching a decisive point for future applications, US Air Force Directed Energy Research Lab Chief Engineer Dr. Kelly Hammett said. “There is a realization that directed energy technology is essentially at a tipping point,” Hammett said in a speech on the future of ballistic missile defense at the US Capitol on Tuesday. Directed-energy weapons emit highly focused energy and transfer it to a target. Hammett explained that developments over the past five years have led experts to conclude that directed energy weapons for missile defense “are feasible and achievable.” In 2010, the US Department of Defense demonstrated the ability to kill a theatre class ballistic missile in its initial boost phase using a high-powered Airborne Laser (ABL) system. The initial ABL program ran into numerous problems and limitations, which Hammett noted are being worked out in the current generation of technology under development at the Air Force Research Lab. The original ABL system, fashioned to the front end of a Boeing 747 airplane, ran a megawatt chemical oxygen iodine laser through a 1.5 meter aperture optical system to track the targeted ballistic missile. The program faced challenges in the survivability of the large platform — a modified 747 — the large chemical payload to fuel the laser, and the technological and scientific hurdle of overcoming atmospheric distortions while flying at transonic speeds. To overcome the challenges, the Air Force Research Lab is working to compensate for aero-effects at supersonic flight speeds, and is shifting from chemical to solid state laser technology, to reduce weight and increase agility, Hammett explained. “We have some collaboratively funded efforts to push the industrial base, to push the technology development, to scale these systems up in power to relevant tactical and then maybe in the more longer term strategic ranges of applicability,” Hammett said. The directed energy program at the Air Force Research Lab currently receives only $150 million in funding, compared to the Missile Defense Agency’s budget of more than $6 billion. The use of directed energy for missile defense has been envisioned since the latter part of the Cold War, but has yet to come into use on the battlefield. http://sputniknews.com/military/20150729/1025154048.html Return to Top

The Washington Free Beacon – Washington, D.C. Strategic Command Focused on Hypersonic Missile Threat Chinese, Russian high-speed weapons a new concern By Bill Gertz July 30, 2015 OMAHA—China and Russia are developing maneuvering high-speed strike vehicles that pose new threats to the United States, U.S. Strategic Command leaders said Wednesday. Adm. Cecil D. Haney, Strategic Command’s (Stratcom) senior leader, said during remarks at a nuclear deterrence conference that despite arms control efforts, hypersonic weapons are among several threatening strategic trends emerging in the world. China has conducted four flight tests of a 7,000 mile-per-hour maneuvering strike vehicle, and Russia is developing high-speed weapons and reportedly tested a hypersonic weapon in February. “Nation states continue to develop and modernize their nuclear weapon capabilities,” Haney said. “Nuclear and non-nuclear nations are prepared to employ cyber, counter-space, and asymmetric capabilities as options for achieving their objectives during crisis and conflict, and new technologies such as hypersonic glide vehicles are being developed, complicating our sensing and defensive approaches.” The advanced weapons capabilities are being proliferated by U.S. adversaries and “are becoming increasingly mobile, hardened, and underground, which is further compounded by a lack of transparency,” the four-star admiral said. Asked later about the hypersonic missile threat, Haney said the Pentagon is developing capabilities that can be used to counter hypersonic arms. “As I look at that threat, clearly the mobility, the flight profile, those kinds of things are things we have to keep in mind and be able to address across that full kill chain,” Haney said. “Kill chain” is military jargon for the process used to find targets, gauge location and speed, communicate data to weapons used to strike the target, and then launch an attack. Stratcom is in charge of U.S. nuclear weapons and warfighting, and is tasked with protecting and countering threats to strategic space systems and cyberspace, which is used for command and control of both conventional and nuclear weapons. Hypersonic weapons are ultra-high speed weapons launched atop missiles that accelerate to speeds of between Mach 5 and Mach 10—five and ten times the speed of sound. The vehicles fly along the edge of space and can glide and maneuver to targets. Air Force Lt. Gen. James Kowalski, the outgoing deputy commander at Stratcom, said hypersonic strike vehicles are part of efforts by nations to gain strategic advantage. Hypersonic weapons technology “certainly offers a number of advantages to a state,” Kowalski said. “It offers a number of different ways to overcome defenses, whether those are conventional, or if someone would decide to use a nuclear warhead, I think gives it an even more complicated dimension,” Kowalski added. The three-star general said, “at this point since nothing is fielded it remains something that concerns us and may be an area of discussion in the future.” Hypersonic weapons are being developed by China and Russia to defeat U.S. strategic missile defenses that currently are designed to counter non-maneuvering ballistic missile warheads that travel in more predictable flight paths that are tracked by sensors and can be hit by missile interceptors. The National Air and Space Intelligence Center has testified to Congress that China’s hypersonic glide vehicle will be used to deliver nuclear weapons. A variant also could be used as part of China’s conventionally-armed anti-ship ballistic missile system, which is aimed at sinking U.S. aircraft carriers far from Chinese shores. Russian officials have said their hypersonic arms development is aimed to penetrate U.S. missile defenses. China has conducted four tests of what the Pentagon calls a Wu-14 hypersonic glide vehicle. The four tests over the past several years are an indication the program is a high priority for Beijing. The Pentagon is also developing hypersonic vehicles, both gliders and “scramjet” powered weapons. A year ago, an Army test of a hypersonic weapon blew up shortly after launch from Kodiak Island, Alaska. Haney said some of his concerns are being reduced by U.S. weapons research. “I am assured in some regards because we ourselves are doing some research and development associated with understanding that kind of capability,” Haney said. “But at the same time, clearly, we are working to ensure that we can do what we always do with any threat—be able to understand it and then be able to have a variety of courses of action in order to address it, number one, to deter its use, but then of course to be able to have our own mechanisms to counter that kind of capability.” Haney said it is “very important that we pay attention to that kind of capability.” Nuclear deterrence, preventing foreign nuclear weapons states from attacking, requires more than warheads and bombs on aircraft and missiles, Haney said. “To have a credible, safe, secure, and effective nuclear deterrent, we must also ensure we have the appropriate intelligence and sensing capabilities to give us those early indications and warnings of threats coming against the U.S. and our Allies including—but not limited to—missile launches and bomber threats,” he said. “We must also maintain the ability to communicate and provide the president options should deterrence fail.” As a result, Stratcom also must protect space assets and cyberspace in a conflict, he added. “Peacetime activities must shape the environment of crisis and conflict and dissuade our adversaries from considering the use of cyber, space, or nuclear in a strategic attack,” Haney said. Kowalski, the deputy commander, also was asked in a meeting with reporters about China’s development of multi-warhead missiles and whether the deployment of additional weapons will change the U.S. nuclear force posture. “I’m not aware that there’s been any significant change in the overall size of the Chinese [nuclear] inventory that may cause us to go back and reassess,” Kowalski said. “Right now we’re pretty comfortable that they’re well below 300 [warheads] and there’s a mix in there,” he said, adding that intelligence estimates of the Chinese arsenal are deficient and that there is a need for greater openness on the part of the Chinese. http://freebeacon.com/national-security/strategic-command-focused-on-hypersonic-missile- threat/ Return to Top

Yonhap News Agency – Seoul, South Korea N.K. Building High Explosives Assembly Facility for Nuclear Weapons at Yongbyon: 38 North July 27, 2015 WASHINGTON, July 26 (Yonhap) -- North Korea appears to be constructing a building at its main Yongbyon nuclear complex, where conventional high explosive components of a nuclear weapon can be assembled or stored, a U.S. research institute said. The building includes five cells, and satellite imagery taken on July 21 shows that these cells may be used to assemble or store conventional high explosive components of a nuclear weapon, the website 38 North said in a report. The outside walls of the cells could be "blow-out panels," it said. "Found on high explosive (HE) assembly and storage buildings to reduce the level of damage if an HE assembly explodes during assembly or storage, a blow-out panel directs most of the energy outside the structure, so adjacent cells are not damaged," the report said. "The energy directed outside is deflected upward by a surrounding earthen berm," it said. The recent satellite imagery also showed that construction is continuing at the still incomplete light water reactor site at the Yongbyon complex, 38 North said. "The construction adjacent to the reactor hall can now be identified as a transformer yard to connect the electricity producing reactor to the grid. The yard appears to be complete, but all the equipment is probably not yet installed," it said. "Once finished, the North Koreans will have taken another step towards beginning initial operation of the reactor," it said. The report also said that the North's five-megawatt nuclear reactor, which the communist nation has used to produce plutonium for nuclear bombs, "may not be operating or is only functioning at low power levels." It said there is "no evidence such as steam or hot water discharge" that would suggest the reactor is operating. The reactor is believed to have provided Pyongyang with weapons-grade plutonium that the regime used in its three nuclear tests conducted in 2006, 2009 and 2013. The North has also built a uranium enrichment facility that gives Pyongyang a second way of building nuclear bombs in addition to its plutonium program. The six-party talks aimed at ending Pyongyang's nuclear program have been stalled since the last session in late 2008. North Korea has called for resuming negotiations without preconditions, but the U.S. has demanded Pyongyang first take concrete steps demonstrating its denuclearization commitments. http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news/2015/07/27/0200000000AEN20150727000300315.html Return to Top

The Daily Telegraph – London, U.K. North Korea Marks Korean War Anniversary with Threat to 'Leave No Americans Alive' North Korea rails against US imperialism as the reclusive state celebrates 62 years since an armistice brought the three-year Korean War to an end By Danielle Demetriou, Tokyo 27 July 2015 North Korean leaders have warned the United States that another war on the Korean Peninsula would leave no Americans alive, as the reclusive state marked the 62nd anniversary of the end of the Korean War. Flags and banners decorated the capital Pyongyang and other cities across North Korea to mark the anniversary, as communities gathered for patriotic speeches, mass dance celebrations and to lay flowers at statues of the state’s founder. The anniversary, celebrated annually in North Korea, marks the signing of an armistice on 27th July 1953, which brought to an end three years of fighting in the Korean War. While no peace treaty was signed, the anniversary is traditionally hailed by North Korea as a victory over “imperialist” US, which fought alongside South Korean and UN allies against the renegade state. Kim Jong-un, North Korea’s third generation leader, paid his respects by visiting Kumsusan Palace of the Sun at midnight on Sunday where the embalmed bodies of his father Kim Jong-il and state founding grandfather Kim-Il-sung lie in state, according to the Korean Central News Agency. Earlier, the state’s leader and his senior ranking officials had ramped up their anti-US rhetoric to mark the occasion, urging younger generations to inherit the spirit of defending North Korea as shown by war veterans. Highlighting the state’s nuclear arsenal, Kim said in a speech: “Gone forever is the era when the United States blackmailed us with nukes; now the United States is no longer a source of threat and fear for us and we are the very source of fear for it.” At a separate gathering on Sunday, General Pak Yong-sik of the Korean People’s Army, who is thought to be the country’s new defence minister, also delivered a rousing speech to gathered officials, veterans and diplomat in Pyongyang. The official declared that if the US did not abandon its anti-Pyongyang policies and provokes another war, the North would be prepared to fight until “there would be no one left to sign a surrender document”. He added: “It is more than 60 years since the ceasefire on [the] land, but peace has not yet settled on it. “The past Korean War brought about the beginning of the downhill turn for the US, but the second Korean war will bring the final ruin to US imperialism.” The celebrations coincided with a report by 38 North, a US research group, which claimed North Korea was constructing a building at its main Yongbyon nuclear complex for assembling and storing the highly explosive components of a nuclear weapon. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/11765368/North-Korea-marks- Korean-War-anniversary-with-threat-to-leave-no-Americans-alive.html Return to Top

TASS Russian News Agency – Moscow, Russia North Korea Will Not Give Up Nuclear Weapons Unilaterally — Ambassador It is North Korea’s consistent position to boost nuclear deterrent forces with the aim of countering the ever growing threat of nuclear war with US, the ambassador noted July 28, 2015 BEIJING, July 28. /TASS/. Pyongyang will not give up nuclear weapons unilaterally, North Korea’s Ambassador to China Ji Zae Ryong said on Tuesday. "We are absolutely not interested in dialogue [six-party talks on Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons program] on precondition that North Korea ‘freezes’ or gives up completely its nuclear weapons. Nuclear deterrence forces are not a bargaining chip at the negotiations table," the ambassador noted. "North Korea is a country that owns nuclear weapons. The fact of owning nuclear weapons is fixed in North Korea’s Constitution. Apart from that, works on miniaturizing and diversifying nuclear weapons have long been underway in our country. It is North Korea’s consistent position to boost nuclear deterrent forces with the aim of countering the ever growing threat of nuclear war with US," Ji Zae Ryong said. The diplomat stressed that the mechanism used to reach agreements on Iran’s nuclear program will not work with North Korea, since Pyongyang, unlike Tehran, "already has nuclear weapons." http://tass.ru/en/world/811098 Return to Top

TASS Russian News Agency – Moscow, Russia North Korea May Conduct Nuclear Tests in October — Deputy UN Envoy North Korea has conducted three nuclear tests - in 2006, in 2009 and in 2013 July 28, 2015 UNITED NATIONS, July 28. /TASS/. North Korea may conduct another nuclear test in October to mark the 70th anniversary of the Worker’s Party of Korea, North Korea’s deputy Permanent Representative at the United Nations Jang Il-hun said on Tuesday, commenting on media reports about Pyongyang’s nuclear plans. He said his country would mark the Workers’ Party jubilee on October 10 and would organize large-scale celebrations. And since the country was not bound by any international conventions, it was free to do what it wanted, he said, adding he did not rule out another nuclear test on that occasion. However, he noted he was "not in a position" to speak with certainty. The North Korean diplomat said his country’s nuclear deterrence forces were aimed at protecting sovereignty from the "hostile policy" the United States had been pursuing against North Korea in the past 50 years. In the past several years, North Korea has conducted three nuclear tests - in 2006, in 2009 and in 2013. All the three were followed by United Nations Security Council sanctions. North Korea has conducted no nuclear tests in the past two years but performed ballistic missile launches in response to large-scale US-South Korean military drills. http://tass.ru/en/world/811280 Return to Top

The Korea Times – Seoul, South Korea July 29, 2015 N. Korea Completes Upgrade of Rocket Site, shows No Signs of Launch Preparations yet North Korea has completed construction to upgrade its main rocket launch facility, but is still showing no signs of preparations to launch a long-range rocket or missile from the facility, a U.S. research institute said Tuesday. The website 38 North made the assessment citing recent satellite imagery of the North's Sohae Satellite Launching Station. South Korean officials said last week the North completed upgrading the facility to enable it to handle bigger rockets, and a launch could come around the 70th anniversary of the founding of the Workers' Party in October. "There are still no indications at Sohae that test preparations are underway to support a long-range SLV (satellite launch vehicle) launch. There is also no public evidence to suggest that a decision has been made by the leadership in Pyongyang to move forward with a launch," 38 North said in a report. "In the coming weeks, if preparations are indeed underway, we would expect to see other on-the ground indications at Sohae, including increased rail activity and the possible arrival of missile related railcars, activity at facilities associated with rocket assembly," it said. 38 North said the North has completed all construction work at the facility. "It appears that the SLV stages and payload can be prepared horizontally in a new launch support building at the end of the pad, then transferred to a movable support structure that is several stories high, where they will be erected vertically, checked out and finally moved to the launch tower," the report said. Imagery of the facility's engine test stand also showed that preparations were underway, as of July 21, for "an engine test in the near-term," including the presence of a movable crane and probable ground support equipment, the report said. Also Tuesday, a North Korean diplomat left open the possibility of a rocket launch. When asked about the possibility of the North conducting a launch around October, the country's deputy chief of mission to the United Nations, Amb. Jang Il-hun, said he does not "rule out any possibility of doing one of these things," according to a news report. North Korea is believed to have developed advanced ballistic missile technologies through a series of test launches, including a 2012 launch that succeeded in putting a satellite into orbit. That test is considered the most successful so far. That test sparked fears that the North has moved closer to ultimately developing nuclear-tipped missiles that could potentially reach the mainland U.S. The country has so far conducted three underground nuclear tests: in 2006, 2009 and 2013. (Yonhap) https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2015/07/116_183718.html Return to Top

The Korea Herald – Seoul, South Korea Scud Missiles Fired into Saudi Arabia from Yemen Traced to N.Korea: Official July 29, 2015 Scud missiles fired into Saudi Arabia by Yemeni rebels in recent months came from North Korea, a South Korean intelligence official said Wednesday, in the latest case that illustrated North Korea's support for the weapons programs of some countries in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia has shot down about 40 percent of some 20 Scud missiles fired by Yemen's Houthi rebels, said the official, who is familiar with the issue. He did not give further details on how South Korea reached the conclusion that the missiles originated from North Korea. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to media. Missile exports have long been a major source of hard currency for North Korea. "North Korea has sold missiles to Yemen and sent missile engineers to that country in the 1990s," said a former North Korean official, who was in a position to know about the arms deals. Another former North Korean intelligence official in Seoul said North Korea sold many Scud missiles to countries in the Middle East, noting Egypt was the hub of North Korea's arms trade in the region. The two former North Korean officials, who later defected to South Korea, asked not to be identified, citing the issue's sensitivity. North Korea's Scud-B missiles and Scud-C missiles have a range of 300 kilometers and 500 kilometers, respectively, according to South Korea's Defense Ministry. http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20150729001197 Return to Top

The Korea Herald – Seoul, South Korea N. Korean Leader Inspects 'War Drills' against U.S., S. Korea July 30, 2015 North Korean leader Kim Jong-un has inspected a high-profile Air Force combat contest, describing it as part of "war preparations" against the United States and South Korea, Pyongyang's state media said Thursday. Kim flew to the expanded Kalma Airport in Wonsan along the country's east coast on his special plane, Chammae-1, to "guide" the Combat Aeronautics Contest, said the Korean Central News Agency. As usual, it did not specify the date. Wonsan is known as his hometown. The contest was the second of its kind in the North's seven-decade history, according to the KCNA. It was held on the occasion of the 62nd anniversary of the Armistice Agreement that has effectively ended the 1950-53 Korean War. The North celebrates it as Victory Day. Kim said the contest was intended to "bring about a radical turn in the drills to round off preparations for a war full of the will to settle with arms accounts with the U.S. imperialists, the chieftain of aggression, and the South Korean puppet group keen to escalate the confrontation with the fellow countrymen and that of social systems, seized with sycophancy toward the U.S.," the KCNA said in its English-version report. In an ensuing speech, Army Gen. Ri Yong-gil, chief of the General Staff of the North's military, also said the peninsula is on the brink of another conflict like the Korean War. Ri accused the U.S. and South Korea of continuing "distortions and reckless war plots." On Wednesday, the North's foreign ministry demanded the allies stop their regular joint defense exercises first in order to resume dialogue. It said talks are not being held due to Washington's "hostile policy" on Pyongyang. The U.S. is misleading public opinions through distortions, an unnamed ministry spokesman said, citing remarks by Sydney Seiler, Washington's special envoy for the six-party talks. On his trip to Seoul earlier this week, Seiler said his government is willing to talk with the North with flexibility shown in the nuclear deal with Iran. "Dialogue won't be held and the vicious cycle of worsening security situations will continue before the U.S. shows its seriousness on dialogue by halting joint military trainings," the spokesman said. It was confirmed that the North's Air Force chief has been promoted to a four-star general, another sign that the young leader Kim places more emphasis on the Air Force. A photo released by the North's media showed Choe Yong-ho, who commands the Air and Anti-Air Force of the Korean People's Army, being put on the rank of a four-star general. Choe was a three-star commander when he made a public appearance for Kim's "field guidance" for female pilots on June 22. Choe has apparently emerged as a top military aide to Kim, having accompanied the leader on his public activities more than ten times this year alone. (Yonhap) http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20150730000287 Return to Top

Sputnik International – Russian Information Agency Russia to Build 5th-Gen. Nuclear Subs by 2020 in Push to Modernize Military According to the general director of Sevmash, a Russian shipbuilding company, the construction of fifth-generation nuclear-powered submarines could begin by 2020. 26 July 2015 MOSCOW (Sputnik) – The construction of fifth-generation nuclear-powered submarines could begin at the Sevmash shipyard in northern Russia by 2020, the company’s general director Mikhail Budnichenko said. “The modernization of the shipyard’s capacity is actively underway to ensure the construction of advanced submarines. This process will provide a platform for the future construction of new- generation boats,” Budnichenko said in an interview with RIA Novosti. He added that at the moment, the company buys new equipment and machinery, updates slipway, and reconstructs freight transfer systems. “In line with the current federal program, the modernization should be completed by 2020,” he added. Russia’s Navy chief, Adm. Viktor Chirkov, said in May that the development of fifth-generation submarines, featuring unified module platforms and integrated robotic weaponry, had already started in Russia. Sevmash shipyard, the largest ship-building complex in Russia, is located in the port city of Severodvinsk on the White Sea. Russia is currently undergoing a $325-billion rearmament program to achieve a 70-percent modernization of its military by 2020. Sevmash shipyard has no problem with import substitution, as equipment and materials produced by “potential aggressor” are not used in the construction of nuclear-powered submarines Mikhail Budnichenko said. The United States, the European Union and their allies imposed several rounds of anti-Russia sanctions aimed at weakening Russia's economy and specifically its defense industry in 2014. As a result, the construction of several ships have been suspended due to lack of engines that were to be supplied by Germany and Ukraine. "Import substitution is not a problem for Sevmash. I think it is needless to say how risky it is in an age of almost unlimited capabilities of IT-technologies to equip submarines with materials and systems produced by ‘potential aggressor’," Budnichenko said in an interview with RIA Novosti. He added that use of only indigenously manufactured equipment and materials in construction of nuclear submarines has been a common practice in Russia since Soviet times. Following sanctions' introduction, in order to replace foreign components used in the country's defense industry, Russia began work on an import substitution program. The military equipment and arms import substitution plan was finalized December 2014 and intended to eliminate Russia's dependency on foreign-made defense products. Sevmash shipyard is on schedule to deliver overhauled nuclear cruiser Admiral Nakhimov to the Russian Navy in 2018, the company’s general director said. “At present, all repair and overhaul works carried out by the shipyard are going according to schedule,” Mikhail Budnichenko said. The Admiral Nakhimov, formerly named the Kalinin, is the third ship of the Kirov class, which saw a total of four heavy guided missile cruisers enter service with the Soviet and then Russian Navy from 1980 to 1998. Only one of the ships, the Pyotr Veliky, is operational, but Russia plans to return the other three to service starting with the Admiral Nakhimov. Sevmash shipyard will be able to build a future aircraft carrier after modernization of the shipyard’s capacity if a relevant decision is made, the company’s general director said. Earlier this month, the head of a department for state defense orders from the United Shipbuilder’s Corporation said that the companies, cost, and dates of construction of the new Russian aircraft carrier had been defined. "After the successful completion of the state rearmament program, if there is a decision to build an aircraft carrier taken at the highest level of the government, as well as if the plan of the company’s development is fulfilled, the shipyard will be able to begin construction," Mikhail Budnichenko said. He added that the company could manufacturing other surface ships as well since it has a considerable experience in this field. http://sputniknews.com/russia/20150726/1025056883.html Return to Top

TASS Russian News Agency – Moscow, Russia Russia Not Planning to Deploy Tu-22M3 Bomber in Crimea Russia has enough warplanes in Crimea "to ensure clear blue sky over us", Russian Air Force Commander said July 27, 2015 RYAZAN, July 27. /TASS/. Russia has no plans to deploy Tu-22M3 bombers in Crimea, Russian Air Force Commander Colonel General Viktor Bondarev said on Monday. "So far, no such tasks have been set. If we do have such tasks we will be obliged to fulfil them," he told journalists when asked about possible deployment of Tu-22M3 bombers in Crimea. Bondarev said Russia had enough warplanes in Crimea "to ensure clear blue sky over us." According to earlier reports, ten Tu-22M3 bombers were temporarily deployed in Crimea during a surprise combat readiness check this spring. http://tass.ru/en/russia/810953 Return to Top

TASS Russian News Agency – Moscow, Russia Live-Firing of Iskander-M Tactical Missiles Completed near Russia's Orenburg A brigade of the Central Military District was earlier raised on alert for a snap check, more than 500 servicemen and 50 units of military equipment took part in the drills July 29, 2015 MOSCOW, July 29. /TASS/. Servicemen from Russia’s Central Military district have live-fired Iskander-M operational-tactical missile systems, assistant to district’s commander Colonel Yaroslav Roschupkin said on Wednesday. "After live-firing at the Totsky range, Iskander-M operators delivered a preemptive strike on tactical missile systems and other remote targets that determine the imaginary enemy’s military potential," Roschupkin said. A brigade of the Central Military District was earlier raised on alert for a snap check. More than 500 servicemen and 50 units of military equipment took part in the drills. Iskander-M is a version of the Iskander tactical missile system supplied to the Russian Armed Forces. It is capable of hitting targets deep inside the enemy lines. The system’s firing range is up to 500 km. The complex comprises a launcher with two missiles, a missile-transporter loader, a command post vehicle, a technical maintenance vehicle, a set of arsenal equipment, a data processing unit, as well as training facilities. http://tass.ru/en/russia/811339 Return to Top

Sputnik International – Russian Information Agency Tu-160M2 to Have New Avionics That Will Increase Its Effectiveness Twofold In addition to a new engine, Russia’s elite Tupolev Tu-160M2 strategic bomber (“White Swan”) is capable of carrying cruise and nuclear missiles and will receive cutting-edge avionics, said Vladimir Mikheev, the adviser of the deputy head of Russia’s Radio-Electronic Technologies Concern (RETC), according to Rossiyskaya Gazeta. 29 July 2015 The new avionics and electronic warfare system of the Tu-160, codenamed Blackjack by NATO military experts, will begin this year. Construction of the design materials and documentation of battle performance characteristics and technical specifications are currently underway, Mikheev informed. "There will be nothing left from the earlier version of Tu-160, only the platform. Much more advanced hardware will be installed on it," Mikheev said, as cited by Rossiyskaya Gazeta. The new avionics system is currently being tested on the Sukhoi PAK FA Tu-50, Russia's fifth- generation fighter. After that, military engineers will take best elements tested on the Tu-50 and use them to create an aircraft with fundamentally new capabilities, the official representative of RETC said. The new strategic bomber will also be equipped with an advanced radio-electronic system, highly effective against anti-aircraft missiles. The revival of the production of this bomber was announced by the Russian Defense Minister in April 2015. The Tu-160M2's advanced equipment will make it possible to increase its effectiveness by more than two-fold as compared to the old version. http://sputniknews.com/military/20150729/1025169545.html Return to Top

Sputnik International – Russian Information Agency Russia to Deliver Modernized Version of S-300 Air Defense System to Iran Russia is modernizing the S-300 air defense systems due to be delivered to Iran. 30 July 2015 MOSCOW (Sputnik) — Russia will deliver to Tehran a modernized version of the S-300 air defense system that is currently being updated for the Iranian customers, Russian Presidential Aide Vladimir Kozhin said Thursday. “It would be the S-300 system, which Iran specifically asked for. It has been a long time [since Russia and Iran signed the deal on S-300 systems delivery], the system has been partially upgraded, but certain elements are still being updated,” Kozhin told RIA Novosti. In April, Russian President Vladimir Putin lifted the ban on S-300 deliveries to Iran under the 2007 contract, shortly after the P5+1 group of international negotiators and Iran reached a framework nuclear agreement. http://sputniknews.com/military/20150730/1025225791.html Return to Top

Mehr News Agency – Tehran, Iran Zarif Reacts to Kerry’s Senate Hearing Remarks Saturday, 25 July 2015 TEHRAN, Jul. 25 (MNA) – Iran’s FM Zarif has responded to recent remarks by US Secretary of States John Kerry, calling them “incomplete references to some issues raised at nuclear negotiations ”. In response to some of Kerry’s claims at a hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Thursday over the conclusion of the nuclear talks with Iran, Mohammad Javad Zarif underscored the Iranian nation’s resistance against various kinds of international pressure in a bid to dissuade them from pursuing a peaceful nuclear program and its rights under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), adding such resistance finally forced the US to leave confrontation for negotiation . The Iranian diplomat also criticized Kerry’s remarks over 'US capability to use military force' against Iran, dismissing it as a 'hollow threat'. “This kind of talks belongs to the last century and is opposed to the jus cogens of the international law today,” said Zarif while advising the US to put aside the language of threat and sanctions against the people of Iran 'once and for all'. Zarif further maintained that he had repeatedly told Kerry during the negotiations that Iranians would never show strong reaction to US policies without a good reason. He noted that the US hostile moves against Iran over the past 60 years including “the coup against a democratic government and its support for the coup government in 1953, all-out support for the Pahlavi regime, and backing Saddam Hussein regime in its countless crimes against the people of Iraq and Iran, are the reasons for the Iranians’ anger at Washington. Zarif further stated that contrary to Kerry’s remarks, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) clearly specified that the contents of the UN Security Council Resolution 2231 are different from those of the nuclear agreement reached between Iran and the 5+1 on July 14. “Some issues Mr. Kerry raised over Iran’s support for its regional allies with battling extremism and the ISIL Takfiri terrorists as its forefront have no relation to the agreement,” Zarif said, adding that Tehran would do everything in its capacity to counter terrorism and extremism in the region. The Iranian Foreign Minister also stressed that US efforts to create divisions among Iranian authorities and people are “doomed to failure," advising the Americans to avoid repeating their past mistakes regarding such forged categorizations . US Secretary of States John Kerry faced tough questioning by a largely skeptical panel of senators at a Senate committee hearing over Iran nuclear deal on Thursday. The US Senate is most likely to try out new lines of attack throughout the agreement's 60-day Congressional review period. http://en.mehrnews.com/news/108754/Zarif-reacts-to-Kerry-s-Senate-hearing-remarks Return to Top

FARS News Agency – Tehran, Iran Sunday, July 26, 2015 IRGC Deputy Top Commander: US Unable to Take Slightest Hostile Move against Iran TEHRAN (FNA) - Lieutenant Commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Brigadier General Hossein Salami played down the US officials' war rhetoric against Iran, warning that the US knows its slightest hostile move would receive a crushing response. Brigadier General Salami's remarks came after US State Secretary John Kerry threatened to use military action against Tehran if it fails to respect a historic nuclear deal sealed on 14 July. "Today the US knows that the slightest move against the Islamic Iran will ruin its house of dream," Brigadier General Salami said, addressing a ceremony in the city of Zahedan, Southeastern Iran, on Sunday. He pointed to the US officials' catch phrase "all military option are still on the table" even after the Vienna nuclear agreement, and said, "The Americans have always resorted to bullying because they lack diplomatic skills… ." On May 7, Brigadier General Salami stressed that the country has prepared itself for the worst case scenario. "We have prepared ourselves for the most dangerous scenarios and this is no big deal and is simple to digest for US; we welcome war with the US as we do believe that it will be the scene for our success to display the real potentials of our power," Salami said in an interview with the state-run TV at the time In relevant remarks on Friday, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif in a statement blasted US officials' recent comments against Tehran after the country and the world powers reached a nuclear agreement earlier this month, calling on them to kick the bad habit of threatening Iran. "Unfortunately, the US secretary of state has spoken of the worn-out rope of 'the US capability to use military force'," Zarif said on Friday. Noting that Kerry knows such words are empty threats and was told during the nuclear negotiations between Iran and the world powers that the Iranian nation stands up and resists against such moves, he said, "Such comments are related to the past century and he (Kerry) and other US officials have admitted many times that such threats don’t affect the Iranian people's resolve and will change the situation to their (the Americans') disadvantage." "Therefore, it is better for the Americans to forget their old habit and leave the language of threats and sanctions against this great people once and for all," Zarif said. He also underlined the Iranian officials' united stance on different issues, including relations with the US within the framework of the guidelines specified by Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei, and said the US had better avoid repeating its past mistake of sowing discord among the Iranian officials. Iran and the world powers reached a final agreement in Vienna on July 14 to end a 13-year-old nuclear standoff. After the agreement, the UN Security Council unanimously endorsed a draft resolution turning into international law the JCPOA reached between Iran and the 5+1 (the US, Russia, China, Britain and France plus Germany) group of countries over the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program. All 15 members of the UNSC voted for the draft UN resolution in New York, setting the stage for the lifting of Security Council sanctions against Iran. The text of the draft UN resolution calls for the “full implementation” of the Vienna agreement “on the timetable established,” and urges UN member countries to facilitate the process. http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13940504001205 Return to Top

BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) News – London, U.K. Iran Nuclear: Media Ordered to Be Positive about Deal By Kasra Naji, BBC Persian 26 July 2015 The Iranian authorities have ordered the media not to criticise the recent nuclear agreement with world powers, it has emerged. A top secret document sent to newspaper editors has surfaced on the internet. Issued by the ministry in charge of the press, the two-page document faxed to media organisations relays directives from Iran's Supreme National Security Council. It says editors should praise the deal and the negotiating team. It stresses the need "to safeguard the achievements of the talks"; avoid sowing "doubt and disappointment among the public"; and avoid giving the impression of "a rift" at the highest levels of government. It's been the reformist newspapers in Iran that have been the target of such orders in the past - orders that for example sought to stifle debate about the advisability of the whole nuclear programme, and its cost to the nation. But this secret document seems to target the hardline newspapers for once - newspapers that have been critical of the nuclear deal reached in Vienna on 14 July. The order enacted a few days ago seems to have worked. There is hardly a dissenting voice. This is while the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has not come out for or against the deal, preferring to wait for the time being. The directive to the editors of the newspapers and news agencies shows how nervous the authorities are about reaction from the hardliners who occupy key positions in many of the country's centres of power, including the Revolutionary Guards corp. In the first days following the agreement, the hardliners were very critical of the deal, complaining about a host of undertakings that Iran had given at the talks. But most importantly, to them the deal meant Iran has foregone its ability to build nuclear weapons in return for lifting of the sanctions. The hardliners have always harboured the idea that Iran should be capable of building the bomb, so that it could boast about it and deter Israel as well as the US from ever contemplating an attack. They always entertained the hope that Iran could reach the point of being only the turn-of-a-screw away from the building the bomb. Under the deal, Iran maintains a much smaller nuclear programme while world powers believe they have closed all its pathways to making a bomb. The silence of Iran's Supreme Leader so far has been interpreted as approval, albeit reluctant. He has said time and again that Iran went to the talks on the basis of expediency. This is a reference to the chaos the sanctions created for the Iranian economy. The directive to the editors relaying the orders of the country's top national security body, the Supreme National Security Council, means that Iran has decided it will abide by the agreement and that it will pass the scrutiny of parliament too. The question now is whether the hardliners will go along. While the directive has worked for the time being, they will not necessarily remain silent. Directive to editors, key points The need to safeguard the achievements of the talks which are amongst top national security and interests of the country Avoid selectivity in the analysis of the achievements of the talks Avoid impression of rift amongst top levels of the government on talks Emphasis on explanation of the agreement Avoid creation of doubt and disappointment among the public Avoid impression of rift between govt and people Avoid the creation of impression of gap between achievement of talks and Islamic, revolutionary and national ideals Explanatory attitude instead of critical treatment of the story Note the big achievements in our nuclear programme as a result of the agreement Emphasise the importance of the two sides in the agreement remaining committed to it http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-33668390 Return to Top

Tasnim News Agency – Tehran, Iran Araqchi Clarifies “Reversibility” of JCPOA Commitments for Iran July 28, 2015 TEHRAN (Tasnim) – Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said the country will be able to “immediately” reverse its commitments under a final nuclear deal with world powers if it finds out that the other side has breached commitments under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Actions (JCPOA). Iran and the Group 5+1 (Russia, China, the US, Britain, France and Germany) on July 14 finalized the text of a lasting agreement on Tehran’s nuclear program. Dubbed the JCPOA, the 159-page document has subjected Iran and the six other countries to comply with a series of commitments, resulting in the termination of sanctions on Iran in exchange for certain restrictions on Tehran’s nuclear program during a defined period of time. Afterwards, the 15-memebr United Nations Security Council passed a resolution that endorsed the JCPOA. According to the UNSC Resolution 2231, all previous UNSC sanctions imposed on Iran over its nuclear program will be terminated when the JCPOA takes effect. The new resolution has also devised a reversibility mechanism in condition that a party complains about a “significant non-performance of commitments under the JCPOA”. The resolution stipulates that once the UNSC receives a notification by a JCPOA participant state about a significant non-performance of commitments, it will have 30 days to vote on a draft resolution to “continue in effect the terminations” of the previous anti-Iran resolutions. It also notes that if the UNSC does not adopt a resolution to continue in effect the termination of the past anti-Iran sanctions, all of the previous anti-Iran resolutions will be reinstated in the same manner as before. The so-called “snapback” plan has caused concern for some Iranian critics. They say that even if Iran makes a complaint about breach of the JCPOA commitments by the other parties, again the UNSC will have the authority to adopt a resolution for keeping the Resolution 2231 in place. Otherwise, the previous anti-Iran resolutions will be automatically reinstated. In response, Araqchi, who was also a senior negotiator in the nuclear talks, told the Tasnim News Agency that the JCPOA and the UNSC Resolution 2231 should be taken into account together. “The talk of reversibility begins from the agreement (JCPOA) and it includes a 60-day process,” he said. Araqchi explained that in case a party cites any breach of the deal, “the issue should be put forward firstly in a joint commission, then in a meeting of foreign ministers of Iran and the (Group) 5+1, and then in a three-member consultative council,” before the UNSC resolution could be considered. “It is natural that if the complainant is Iran, the country will no more wait for the (UN) Security Council’s decisions if the issue will be referred to the Security Council after those stages, because the Security Council’s decisions will relate to its own members,” he explained. Whenever Iran feels the other side has not honored its commitments, the “reversibility” of Tehran’s nuclear program will happen immediately, he said. “While such reversibility for them requires the case to be sent to the Security Council and going through those processes, for us, it could happen immediately and after 30 days,” Araqchi pointed out. http://www.tasnimnews.com/english/Home/Single/812373 Return to Top

Ha’aretz Daily News – Tel Aviv, Israel UN Agency May Allow Iran to Gather Soil Samples at Alleged Nuclear Site IAEA probe is part of the overarching nuclear deal reached earlier this month between Iran and six world powers. By The Associated Press July 28, 2015 VIENNA — Iran wants its own officials to take soil samples at a site where it is alleged to have experimented with ways to detonate a nuclear weapon, and the U.N. agency probing the suspicions may agree provided it is allowed to monitor the process, two officials told The Associated Press Tuesday. The investigation by the International Atomic Energy Agency is part of the overarching nuclear deal reached earlier this month between Iran and six world powers. Iran denies any such work but has agreed to give the IAEA access to the Parchin military complex. Several U.S. senators cited Obama administration officials last week as saying Iran could conduct its own soil sampling at Parchin. The officials who spoke to the AP said a final agreement has not yet been reached between Iran and the IAEA. The officials said stringent oversight of the soil-sampling could include video monitoring. They did not say what reasons Iran gave for wanting to take its own samples. The samples would be analyzed by the agency for traces left by any nuclear experiments. The officials come from IAEA member nations and are tasked with following Iran's nuclear program. They demanded anonymity because their information is confidential. The IAEA had no immediate comment. David Albright, whose Institute for Science and International Security is often consulted by the U.S. government on proliferation issues, said the IAEA "could instruct Iran in where and how to take the sample, as they would an inspector. They could try to keep a close watch on how Iran follows the instructions." At the same time, "the IAEA could not exclude Iran tampering with the sample in some way," he said. Iran has refused to give IAEA experts access to people, documents and sites allegedly linked to the suspected weapons work for nearly a decade. But in its quest for the end to nuclear-related sanctions, it agreed earlier this month to work with the agency, and IAEA chief Yukiya Amano has said he expects to be able to deliver a report by December. The alleged weapons work and the IAEA's investigation are not central to the nuclear deal, which calls for the U.S. and other world powers to end economic and military sanctions in exchange for concessions from Iran in its nuclear program. Tehran says its program is entirely peaceful, but the U.S. and most other nations believe it is aimed at acquiring nuclear weapons. Still, U.S. lawmakers skeptical of the deal see the matter of whether the U.N. agency will receive full cooperation from Iran as a core issue. Congress began a 60-day review of the accord last week. The suspected explosives testing at Parchin, south of Tehran, is only one of 11 alleged cases of nuclear weapons-related work listed by the IAEA, based on U.S., Israeli and other intelligence and its own research. Tehran insists Parchin is a conventional military area with no link to nuclear tests. In recent years, it has carried out major construction and paving at the site where the alleged experiments took place, while refusing dozens of IAEA requests for a visit. http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/1.668321 Return to Top

Xinhua News – Beijing, China Kerry Warns of Consequences if Congress Rejects Iran Nuclear Deal (Xinhua) July 29, 2015 WASHINGTON, July 28 (Xinhua) -- The best chance to resolve the Iran nuclear issue through peaceful means will be squandered if Congress moves to reject the agreement negotiated with Tehran, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry warned Tuesday. "Let me underscore, the alternative to the deal that we have reached is not some kind of unicorn fantasy that contemplates Iran 's complete capitulation," Kerry told members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Testifying before the panel with Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz and Treasury Secretary Jack Lew, Kerry sought to win support from skeptical lawmakers, who have expressed deep concern that the deal did not go far enough to curb Iran's controversial nuclear program. Iran and six world major countries -- the U.S., Britain, China, Russia, France and Germany -- reached an agreement on July 14 over the Iranian nuclear issue that will put Iran on the path of sanctions relief but more strict limits on its nuclear program. "So in the real world, we have two options," Kerry said. "Either we move ahead with this agreement to ensure that Iran's nuclear program is limited, rigorously scrutinized and wholly peaceful, or we have no agreement at all -- no inspection, no restraints, no sanctions, no knowledge of what they're doing, and they start to enrich." Congress is in the midst of 60-day review period of the deal. U. S. President Barack Obama had vowed to veto any congressional attempt to block the implementation of the Iran nuclear deal. It requires two-thirds approval in both the House and Senate to override the veto. Skepticism from members of Congress is also shared by the public as a new CNN/ORC poll found that a majority of Americans want Congress to reject the nuclear deal with Iran. According to CNN, 52 percent of the respondents say Congress should reject the deal, while 44 percent say it should be approved. The new poll finds a sharp partisan gap on the issue, with 66 percent of Republicans and 55 percent of independents saying Congress ought to reject it and 61 percent of Democrats saying it should be approved. http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-07/29/c_134456593.htm Return to Top

FARS News Agency – Tehran, Iran Wednesday, July 29, 2015 Leader's Aide: UNSC Resolution on Iran's Defensive Capabilities Unacceptable TEHRAN (FNA) - Iranian Supreme Leader's top adviser for international affairs Ali Akbar Velayati stressed that Iran will never accept the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolution on Islamic Republic's defensive capabilities. On July 20, the UNSC unanimously endorsed a draft resolution turning into international law the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) agreed by Iran and the P5+1 group of countries over the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program. "The recent UNSC resolution (Resolution 2231) on Iran's defensive capabilities, specially its missiles, is unacceptable to Iran," Velayati told reporters on the sidelines of a meeting with a science delegation from the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM). He underlined that the Islamic Republic of Iran will never accept that. "This resolution has been prepared under the influence of expansionist western states to undermine Iran's defense, and specially missile capabilities, and it is unacceptable from Iran's point of view," Velayati added. He noted that the UNSC measure is aimed at depriving Iran of its independence, and said, "The goal of these moves by the UNSC which is under their (the western powers') influence is to deprive Iran of its Islamic-Iranian identity, independence and territorial integrity, but Iran will not accept this and other similar resolutions." All 15 members of the UNSC voted for the draft UN resolution in New York on Monday, setting the stage for the lifting of Security Council sanctions against Iran. The text of the draft UN resolution calls for the “full implementation” of the Vienna agreement “on the timetable established,” and urges UN member countries to facilitate the process. The Iranian Foreign Ministry in a statement last Monday ensured that the country's ballistic missile program and capability is untouched and unrestricted by the UN Security Council Resolution 2231. "Within this framework, Iran's military capabilities, including its ballistic missiles, are exclusively for legitimate defense; these equipment have not been designed for the capability to carry nuclear payloads and thus, fall outside the scope and the jurisdiction of the UNSC resolution and its annexes," the Iranian foreign ministry statement stressed. http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13940507000936 Return to Top

Trend News Agency – Baku, Azerbaijan Verification of Iran N-Program Depends on Secret Agreement with IAEA By Fatih Karimov, Trend 29 July 2015 A senior nuclear expert believes that the verification of Iran N-program depends on a secret agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency and this country's full cooperation with the UN body. Secretary of State John Kerry insisted on July 28 the Barak Obama administration has not seen the contents of two side agreements to the Iran nuclear deal reached between that country and the IAEA. Besides an agreement between Iran and P5+1 and signing the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), Iran also signed a bilateral agreement with the IAEA to solve remaining disputes and answer the UN body's questions in coming weeks. While ignoring the objections of both Iran and U.S. lawmakers, the implementation of nuclear agreement depends on verification of Iran's nuclear program by the IAEA. Tehran says the removal of sanctions based on nuclear agreement could start in four to six months. Iran has also asked the IAEA to keep the mutual agreement hidden. Responding to a question about "how long a time is needed for the IAEA to prove Iran's nuclear activities have been totally peaceful and does the measures, mentioned in the nuclear agreement guarantee this program would remain peaceful?", Toby Dalton, Co-Director, Nuclear Policy Program at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace told Trend on July 29 that "first, how long it will take the IAEA to be able to say that Iran's program is totally peaceful will depend very heavily on how much Iran cooperates in the investigation of past activities. It could be five years, 10 years, or never - it is impossible to say at this point I think until we know more about the cooperation given by Iran to the IAEA, although the agreement does stipulate that the IAEA should be able to say in eight years that Iran's program is peaceful". Iran has agreed to put restrictions in some nuclear activities from eight to 15 years. The nuclear expert added that "second, the point that is not acknowledged by critics of the deal is that without these provisions in place through the deal, there would be no process for the IAEA to determine whether the program is peaceful or not. So compared to what existed before the deal, there is a much better chance the IAEA can carry out a thorough investigation that will reach conclusion". "Third, there is no guarantee, either under the deal or not under the deal and regardless of the verification provisions in place, that Iran's nuclear program will remain peaceful. That is up to Iran. The deal certainly creates incentives and disincentives for Iran that should limit its desire to build nuclear weapons, and my view is that the deal is more likely to ensure that Iran's program is focused on nuclear energy than nuclear weapons than would a simple continuation of the sanctions regime in place," he said. The U.S. Republicans argue that the achieved JCPOA is not enough to ensure Iran's nuclear program would remain peaceful, while Iranian hardliners says the agreement has damaged Iran's rights. http://en.trend.az/iran/nuclearp/2420681.html Return to Top

RT (Russia Today) – Moscow, Russia Saudi Arabia to Buy 600 Patriot Missiles for $5.4 bn 29 July 2015 Washington is set to approve a $5.4 billion sale of 600 advanced Patriot missiles to Saudi Arabia. More such sales are expected in the coming months, defense analysts say, as Gulf nations react to the Iran nuclear deal by buying US weapons systems. According to a notice sent to Congress by the Pentagon on Wednesday, the State Department has approved a request by Saudi Arabia to purchase $5.4 billion worth of PAC-3 missiles. “The proposed sale will modernize and replenish Saudi Arabia’s current Patriot missile stockpile, which is becoming obsolete and difficult to sustain due to age and limited availability of repair parts,” said the Pentagon’s notice to Congress. “The purchase of the PAC-3 missiles will support current and future defense missions and promote stability within the region.” PAC-3 stands for the third generation of the Patriot Advanced Capability missile, the interceptor famously deployed during the first Iraq War. Made by Lockheed Martin Corp, the PAC-3, is advertised as the “the world’s most effective air and missile defense interceptor” against aircraft, cruise missiles and tactical ballistic missiles. “Lockheed Martin is supporting the US government and the kingdom of Saudi Arabia as they discuss the potential sale of additional PAC-3 Missiles as part of the upgrade of the Royal Saudi Air Defense Force,” the company said in a statement. Saudi Arabia already bought a $2 billion shipment of Patriots in April, while the Pentagon purchased $1.5 billion worth of Patriots intended for Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Taiwan, South Korea and the Saudis just last week, according to Defense One. Gulf Arab states are eager to purchase US counter-missiles, as embargoes on conventional weapons and missiles against Iran are expected to be lifted in the next five to eight years under the terms of a nuclear deal reached in Vienna on July 14. “We’re going to see more of this,” Thomas Karako, a missile defense expert with the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington told Defense One. “So long as the Iranian missile threat exists, GCC and other countries in the region are going to have to invest in counters, offensive and defensive.” The GCC consists of six Persian Gulf nations: Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Oman, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates. At a summit with GCC envoys in May, President Barack Obama assured his Arab allies that the US would “stand by our GCC partners against external attacks.” A joint statement adopted at the summit committed the US and the GCC to work towards increased security cooperation, particularly “on fast-tracking arms transfers… counter terrorism, maritime security, cybersecurity and ballistic missile defense.” The United Arab Emirates have already acquired a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system, with a greater reach than the Patriot’s. Saudi Arabia and Qatar have also expressed interest in the THAAD, while Qatar is now likely to proceed with the purchase of a missile-tracking radar system. https://www.rt.com/usa/311111-saudi-arabia-patriot-missiles/ Return to Top

Defense News – Springfield, VA DoD to Congress: Iran Deal or No, Military Options Open By Joe Gould July 29, 2015 WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Ash Carter continued the administration's defense of the Iran nuclear deal, telling lawmakers Wednesday that while a pact with Iran carries risks, it is better than the alternative: an inevitable military confrontation. "The effects of a strike are temporary, and secondly, Iran would respond to an American military strike," Carter told the Senate Armed Services Committee, when asked whether a military strike would set Iran's military program back further than the accord. Such a strike could lead Iran to become "irreconcilably committed to getting a nuclear weapon ... Effectively implemented, [the accord] stops Iran from getting a nuclear weapon not just for ten years or 15 years, but way beyond that." Recognizing the deal may fail or fail to be implemented effectively, Carter said he was under presidential instructions to preserve and improve upon the military options, as a fall back. Indeed, the military option becomes slightly more effective under the agreement because, "We have a more complete understandiing where everything is associated with a nuclear program that we might strike," he said. Carter and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey were joined by Secretary of State John Kerry, Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz and Treasury Secretary Jack Lew to answer tough questions from senators in the emotional three-hour hearing. Critics of the deal say it will enrich Iran and help it further destabilize the Middle East, and opponents Tuesday seized on an arrangement between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency, which was part of the deal, but US officials had only been briefed about and had not seen. Apart from House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing earlier in the week that featured Kerry, Lew and Moniz, the SASC hearing was meant to explore the pact's national security implications. Carter and Dempsey — while acknowledging the US deal partner as the world largest state sponsor of terror — assured lawmakers the US will continue its robust Mideast presence and retain military and intelligence activities there. "It's important that we have an agreement and it be verifiable, and that we keep doing what we need to do: Defend our friends and allies, remain strong in the Gulf — frequent navigation, ballistic missile defense, all the things that we're doing, and the agreement doesn't limit us in any way," Carter said. Indeed, "military options remain," Dempsey said, though a negotiated settlement provides a more "durable" solution, as well as time to work with local partner nations to address Iran's activities. Dempsey said there are a series of initiatives with Israel and the Gulf Cooperation Council to that effect. Exercising airstrikes to take out Iran's nuclear capability would disrupt its program by several years, Dempsey said. However analysis suggests it would also provoke Iran to "counter our presence in the region at every opportunity and use these other malign activities they have." At one point, Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., characterized Dempsey's brief opening statement, as a "tepid endorsement" of the accord and "damning disagreement with faint praise," which Dempsey disputed, saying he agreed with the deal. His statement was neither "tepid nor enthusiastic, but pragmatic," Dempsey said. His input in the deal was sought "episodically," his final recommendation given weeks before negotiations concluded. At least in part, his recommendation was to keep pressure on Iran relative to ballistic missiles and arms trafficking for as long as possible. Challenged by Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, over the president's assertion that the US faces a choice between an Iran deal or a resolution by force — which Ernst characterized as "war" — Dempsey said he had not said anything to that effect to the president. "We have a range of options, and I hope to present them," Dempsey said. "As long as we agree, military strikes on a sovereign nation are an act of war, but there are things between here and there." Congress has until Sept. 17 to endorse or reject the pact. Rejection would prevent President Barack Obama from waiving most US-imposed sanctions on Iran. Obama has vowed to veto any congressional rejection measure, meaning both the House and Senate would need to muster two-thirds majorities to override the president. http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/policy-budget/congress/2015/07/29/dod-- congress-iran-deal--no-military-options-open/30843573/ Return to Top

Mehr News Agency – Tehran, Iran Iran Rejects Report of Confidential Annexes to JCPOA Friday, 31 July 2015 TEHRAN, Jul. 31 (MNA) – A senior Iranian nuclear negotiator says there is nothing confidential in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action on Tehran’s nuclear program and its annexes. Abbas Araghchi, however, said the content of a roadmap signed between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency and its related documents are secret, and that the agency is obliged to protect them under international law. The two sides agreed on July 14 to clarify some outstanding issues regarding Iran’s nuclear program. Araghchi also said Tehran will only allow IAEA inspectors from nations that have diplomatic relations with Iran, which does not include the US and Canada. He also guaranteed the inspectors will have no access to classified military documents. After signing the roadmap, IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano said it “sets out a clear sequence of activities over the coming months, including the provision by Iran of explanations regarding outstanding issues. It provides for technical expert meetings, technical measures and discussions, as well as a separate arrangement regarding the issue of Parchin site.” In his latest meeting with members of Iranian Parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Commission broadcasted on Sunday, Araghchi said European foreign ministers have lined up to visit Iran, however, that does not mean we will offer whatever they want, we are the one who choose. “We will decide how to treat each country on the basis of national interests,” Araghchi stressed. During the meeting, Araghchi answered the questions raised by some members of the Parliament on topics including the conditions for lifting of sanctions, inspection of military sites, West’s contradictory statements about JCPOA, confidential agreement with IAEA, conditions of providing 20% of fuel for Tehran reactor operation, inspections of nuclear facilities, conditions for sanctions return, US instrumental use of human rights and support for terrorism, uncertainty about the cancellation or suspension of sanctions, arms and missile embargo and financial, banking sanctions. He explained that the nuclear deal reached between Iran and the 5+1 in Vienna recently stipulates that Iran would voluntarily execute the Additional Protocol until the US Congress sanctions against Tehran are removed. He noticed that a new roadmap has been signed between the IAEA director general and the Iranian nuclear chief to settle points of differences which includes confidential contents. Iran's demand is removal of all sanctions which will also be met alongside all the economic and financial sanctions imposed on the country on the very first day of implementing the deal, Araghchi said. http://en.mehrnews.com/news/108908/Iran-rejects-report-of-confidential-annexes-to-JCPOA Return to Top

People’s Daily Online – Beijing, China Pakistan to Buy 8 Submarines, the Biggest Arms Export Deal for China (People’s Daily Online) July 26, 2015 Pakistan will buy eight submarines from China in a multi-billion dollar deal that will boost Pakistani navy’s maritime capabilities, The Global Times quoted report from Pakistan's The Express Tribune on Friday. An agreement was reached in Islamabad during a meeting between Pakistan Finance Minister Ishaq Dar and Xu Ziqin, President of state-owned China Shipbuilding & Offshore International Company Limited (SCOC) — the trade arm of China Shipbuilding Industry Corporation. It was reported then that the contract could be worth USD 4 billion to USD 5 billion, the biggest arms export deal for China. The two sides in-principle agreed on the sale of eight submarines that China will provide to Pakistan Navy, the report said. Sources in the finance ministry, however, said the deal is subject to final review from higher authorities in Beijing, following which a formal agreement will be signed. They also said that Pakistan would make payments in four installments and the delivery will be made in coming years. According to a vague statement issued by the finance ministry after the meeting, Dar said the visit by the CSOC delegation to Pakistan would strengthen bilateral economic and defense cooperation. “Pakistan and China have reached an understanding on matters of defense cooperation relating to Pakistan Navy,” the statement said. “Financial arrangements to this effect were also concluded,” it added. The statement quoted Xu thanking Dar for his contribution in concluding the arrangements, saying it was reflective of the “deep-rooted” China-Pakistan friendship. The reports of submarines deal was in the air since the visit of Chinese President Xi Jinping to Pakistan in April. http://en.people.cn/n/2015/0726/c90000-8926303.html Return to Top

Portland Press Herald – Portland, ME OPINION/Commentary Commentary: Vienna Deal is Best Way to Keep Iran from Getting Nuclear Weapons If the U.S. backs away, sanctions would unravel, letting the nation again pursue its nuclear program. By John F. Kerry and Ernest Moniz - Special to The Washington Post July 26, 2015 When President Barack Obama took office, he faced an Iran that had mastered the nuclear fuel cycle, had constructed a covert uranium enrichment facility inside a mountain, was on its way to installing nearly 20,000 centrifuges for uranium enrichment, was developing advanced centrifuges and was building a heavy-water reactor that could produce weapons-grade plutonium. If Iran wanted to develop a nuclear weapon, it was already well down that road and the international community had little insight into its program. Against this backdrop the president vowed never to let Iran obtain a nuclear weapon. The deal reached in Vienna this month is not only the best way to prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon but also the only durable and viable option for achieving this goal. This comprehensive diplomatic resolution has the unified support of the world’s leading powers. It extends the time Iran would need to develop a nuclear weapon, provides strong verification measures that give us ample time to respond if Iran chooses that path and takes none of our options off the table. Specifically, the deal blocks each of Iran’s possible pathways to producing fissile material for a nuclear weapon: the highly enriched uranium and the plutonium production pathways, as well as the covert pathway. This deal is based on verification, not trust. Before obtaining significant relief from economic sanctions, Iran must roll back its enrichment, its research-and-development and its stockpile of enriched uranium. To preclude cheating, international inspectors will have unprecedented access to Iran’s declared nuclear facilities and its entire nuclear supply chain. If Iran fails to meet its responsibilities, sanctions will snap back into place, and no country can stop that. If Iran tries to break out of the deal altogether, the world will have a longer time period – a year compared with two months – to respond before it could produce a bomb. We also will have the moral authority that comes from exhausting all diplomatic options. Is this a good deal for the United States and for global security? Consider the facts. • Without this deal, Iran could double its capacity to enrich uranium in a short time. With it, Iran must reduce that capacity immediately and sharply. • Without this deal, Iran could continue to rapidly develop advanced centrifuges. With it, its program will be significantly constrained. • Without this deal, Iran could expand its existing stockpile of enriched uranium. With it, that stockpile will be reduced by 98 percent, and it will be capped at that level for 15 years. Iran will also be required to get rid of its 20 percent enriched uranium, which is most of the way to bomb material. • Without this deal, Iran could produce enough weapons-grade plutonium each year for one to two nuclear weapons. With it, Iran will not produce any weapons-grade plutonium. • Without this deal, Iran could take the steps necessary to produce a nuclear weapon. With it, Iran is prohibited from pursuing any of these steps. If the international community suspects that Iran is cheating, the International Atomic Energy Agency can request access to any suspicious location. Much has been made about a possible 24-day delay before inspectors could gain access to suspected undeclared nuclear sites. To be clear, the agency can request access to any suspicious location with 24 hours’ notice under the Additional Protocol of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, which Iran will implement under this deal. This accord does not change that. Most important, environmental sampling can detect microscopic traces of nuclear activities even after attempts to remove evidence. In February 2003, the agency requested access to a suspicious facility in Tehran, and negotiations dragged on as Iran tried to remove evidence. But even after six months, tests revealed nuclear activity. The plan approved in Vienna does not expire – it is indefinite. Some provisions are in place for 10 years, others for up to 25 years. But the transparency requirements and most fundamental obligation – to preserve the peaceful nature of its nuclear program – are permanent. Meanwhile, economic sanctions will remain intact until Tehran has met its key commitments, which include removing the core of its reactor at Arak, disconnecting and locking away some 13,000 centrifuges and shipping most of its enriched uranium out of the country. For the United States to back away from this deal would be a historic mistake. We would be isolated from our partners, face an unraveling sanctions regime and give Iran the ability to push ahead with its nuclear program. A nuclear-armed Iran is a threat to our allies in the Middle East, the United States and the international community. The president has said clearly that Iran will not get a nuclear weapon. Neither sanctions nor military action can guarantee that outcome. The solution is the comprehensive diplomatic deal reached in Vienna. http://www.pressherald.com/2015/07/26/commentary-vienna-deal-is-best-way-to-keep-iran- from-getting-nuclear-weapons/ Return to Top

The Washington Times – Washington, D.C. OPINION/Commentary ‘Peace for Our Time’ The Iran nuclear deal surrenders to the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism By R. James Woolsey and Peter Vincent Pry Sunday, July 26, 2015 Banner headlines in a prominent national newspaper read “NUKE DEAL PAVES WAY FOR NEW ERA: Sworn Foes U.S., Iran Aim To Bury Hatchet” — without sarcasm. For critics of the Iran nuclear deal, such undeserved praise is ominously reminiscent of the adulatory press that greeted British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain and his ill-fated Munich agreement, upon returning from meeting Adolph Hitler in Nazi Germany on the eve of World War II, declaring, “Peace for our time.” Critics of the Iran nuclear deal are right — it is a very bad deal. It surrenders to the world’s leading sponsor of international terrorism the right to enrich uranium and the technological pathway to eventually build nuclear weapons, and intercontinental missiles to deliver them, on a mass industrial scale, just as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned the U.S. Congress on March 3, 2015. The deal, negotiated without the participation of any of the U.S. allies who must live in the Middle East, next door to the existential threat that is a nuclear Iran, is straining those invaluable relationships to the breaking point and making U.S. security guarantees non-credible. The deal may have started a nuclear arms race in the Middle East already. According to press reports, Saudi Arabia, which has intermediate-range missiles from China, may purchase nuclear warheads from Pakistan. President Obama’s recent meeting with the Saudis, and Defense Secretary Ashton Carter’s trip to Israel, further evidences the extreme angst among U.S. allies about the Iran nuclear deal. Indeed, the nuclear deal with Iran will probably make inevitable another war in the Middle East. Israel’s Netanyahu warns the deal is an “historic mistake” and “worse than the deal … that led to a nuclear arsenal in North Korea” and that Israel will do what it must to protect itself. The deal is so bad that it may achieve the seemingly impossible — a coalition of Israel and the moderate Arab states to launch a pre-emptive war against Iran’s nuclear and missile programs. Such a war would destabilize the global economy and quite possibly involve weapons of mass destruction. Iran has hundreds of missiles capable of striking Israel and the oil fields in Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Iraq with conventional and, reportedly, chemical warheads. The nuclear deal by lifting economic sanctions will gift Iran with $150 billion that could be used to sponsor unprecedentedly destructive terror attacks worldwide — and perhaps to purchase nuclear weapons from North Korea, Iran’s strategic partner by treaty. Some U.S. and Israeli experts assess that Iran has already clandestinely developed nuclear weapons and is following the example of North Korea. The Clinton Administration negotiated an Agreed Framework intended to dismantle nuclear weapons built by North Korea secretly. But North Korea cheated, continuing to build-up their nuclear and missile programs until they became irreversible, while reaping economic and political benefits from the Agreed Framework. President George W. Bush should have heeded Ash Carter (now Secretary of Defense) and former Defense Secretary William Perry, who in a 2006 article urged surgical strikes to prevent North Korea from developing the long-range missiles that threaten the United States today. On April 7, 2015, the North American Aerospace Defense (NORAD) commander, Adm. William Gortney, warned at a press conference that North Korea’s KN08 intercontinental ballistic missile is assessed as having a nuclear warhead, and that NORAD is spending $700 million to further harden its bunker inside Cheyenne Mountain from electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack. North Korea and Iran have both orbited satellites on trajectories that appear to practice evading U.S. national missile defenses and early warning radars by flying on south polar trajectories at altitudes consistent with making a surprise EMP attack on the 48 contiguous United States. The Congressional EMP Commission warned that a nuclear EMP attack could blackout the national electric grid and other life sustaining critical infrastructures for months or years, starving America to death. “Death to America” would become reality, not merely an Iranian chant — achievable by the high-altitude detonation of a single nuclear weapon. Because a single nuclear weapon could achieve “Death to America” by EMP attack, the Iran nuclear deal must be airtight and absolutely sure the mullahs cannot acquire — and do not now have — even one nuclear weapon. Congress should challenge the Obama Administration’s claim that they have, essentially, “slam dunk” intelligence that meets this impossible standard. Given the plethora of concessions over the last two years, Congress should now require President Obama to trash this badly flawed nuclear deal, increase sanctions, shoot down any Iranian satellites and long-range missile tests, and materially support dissidents and the majority of Iran’s people who want regime change. Congress should pass the Critical Infrastructure Protection Act to protect the national electric grid and the American people from an EMP apocalypse — immediately. By the way, on June 13 an Iranian article — with artwork depicting a satellite making an EMP attack from above the globe — announced that Iran circumvented the international sanctions regime to acquire EMP filters, and is now making its own filters, to harden Iran’s critical assets against nuclear EMP. Ambassador R. James Woolsey was director of Central Intelligence and is chairman of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Peter Vincent Pry is executive director of the EMP Task Force on National and Homeland Security. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jul/26/r-james-woolsey-peter-vincent-pry-iran- deal-surren/ Return to Top

The National Interest – Washington, D.C. OPINION/The Buzz The Most Dangerous Nuclear Weapon in America's Arsenal By Zachary Keck July 28, 2015 The United States maintains an extensive nuclear arsenal. According to the Federation of Atomic Scientists, in April of this year the United States maintained an arsenal of over 7,200 nuclear bombs. Of those, more than 2,000 were deployed (1,900 strategic nuclear weapons and 180 non-strategic weapons). America also maintains a plethora of delivery options for its nuclear bombs. As part of its nuclear triad, it maintains some 94 nuclear-capable bombers (B-2s and B-52s), over 400 Minuteman III ICBMs and 12 Ohio-class ballistic missile nuclear submarines. The latter are equipped with modern Trident II submarine-launched ballistic missiles, which are drastic improvements over their land- based competitors. Indeed, as Keir Lieber and Daryl Press have noted, “In 1985, a single U.S. ICBM warhead had less than a 60 percent chance of destroying a typical silo… Today, a multiple-warhead attack on a single silo using a Trident II missile would have a roughly 99 percent chance of destroying it.” Yet the most dangerous nuclear bomb in America’s arsenal may be the new B61-12. Much has been written about the B61-12, most of which has focused on its enormous cost. And for good reason—it is the most expensive nuclear bomb project ever. In terms of sheer destructive capability, the B61-12 is nowhere near America’s most dangerous nuclear weapon. Indeed, the bomb has a maximum yield of just 50-kilotons, the equivalent of 50,000 tons of TNT. By contrast, the B83 nuclear bomb has a maximum yield of 1.2 megatons (1,200 kilotons). What makes the B61-12 bomb the most dangerous nuclear weapon in America’s arsenal is its usability. This usability derives from a combination of its accuracy and low-yield. In terms of the former, the B61-12 is America’s first nuclear-guided bomb, As Hans Kristensen of FAS notes, “We do not have a nuclear-guided bomb in our arsenal today…. It [the B61-12] is a new weapon.” Indeed, according to Kristensen, existing U.S. nuclear bombs have circular error probabilities (CEP) of between 110-170 meters. The B61-12’s CEP is just 30 meters. The B61-12 also has a low-yield. As noted above, the bomb has a maximum yield of 50 kilotons. However, this yield can be lowered as needed for any particular mission. In fact, the bomb’s explosive force can be reduced electronically through a dial-a-yield system. This combination of accuracy and low-yield make the B61-12 the most usable nuclear bomb in America’s arsenal. That’s because accuracy is the most important determinate of a nuclear weapon’s lethality (Yield of warhead^2/3/ CEP^2). As one scholar explains: “Making a weapon twice as accurate has the same effect on lethality as making the warhead eight times as powerful. Phrased another way, making the missile twice as precise would only require one-eighth the explosive power to maintain the same lethality.” Furthermore, radiological fallout operates according to Newton’s inverse square law. In practical terms, all this means that the more accurate the bomb, the lower the yield that is needed to destroy any specific target. A lower-yield and more accurate bomb can therefore be used without having to fear the mass, indiscriminate killing of civilians through explosive force or radioactive fallout. Lieber and Press have documented this nicely. Indeed, using a Pentagon computer model, they estimated that a U.S. counterforce strike against China’s ICBM silos using high-yield weapons detonated at ground blast would still kill anywhere between 3-4 million people. Using low-yield weapons and airbursts, this figure drops to as little as 700 fatalities! This makes using nuclear weapons thinkable for the first time since the 1940s. The B61-12 only encourages this trend further. Zachary Keck is managing editor of The National Interest. http://www.nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/the-most-dangerous-nuclear-weapon-americas- arsenal-13433 Return to Top

The National Interest – Washington, D.C. OPINION/Feature Are America's Long-Range Ballistic Missiles Doomed? "As debate swirls around upgrading the nuclear triad, ICBMs struggle to keep their place in America's arsenal." By Steve Weintz July 28, 2015 For all their speed and destructive power, the first intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) of the late 1950s and early 1960s were more terror weapons than precision munitions. The limited accuracy of the first ICBMs meant that neither U.S. nor Soviet missile forces could kill the other's missile forces or command centers. That left American war planners in a bad bind. By 1964, ICBMs made up the bulk of the U.S. strategic force. The USSR had only a few big missiles, but they packed enough megatons to cripple the U.S. ICBM fleet. The United States could launch its missiles early to prevent their loss, but at the risk of killing half the Soviet population before American warfighters identified the Soviet missiles' targets. If a ballistic missile's value lay in its "countervalue" targeting of civilians, then the U.S. Navy's invulnerable missile subs could assume the strategic role the USAF saw as its own. But if the Air Force had a missile big and accurate enough to threaten Soviet missile forces themselves—a "counterforce" weapon—the flying branch could cement its dominance of the strategic mission. However, a first-strike weapon able to wipe out Soviet missile silos and command bunkers would receive the full brunt of a Soviet nuclear strike. To be credible, a first-strike weapon had to be invulnerable, otherwise the “use-it-or-lose-it” dilemma resurfaced. So began a decades-long quest for an invulnerable basing mode that ended with the fall of the enemy it was designed to defend against. Bizarre Basing Between 1964 and 1979, study groups and defense contractors looked at over thirty different ICBM basing concepts, ranging from the doubtfully probable to the nearly incredible. One could be forgiven for invoking Dr. Seuss: "Could they put it in a boat? Could they even make it float? Or maybe put it on a train, underground, away from rain." The United States might launch ICBMs into orbit during a crisis, their warheads on standby as they circled the globe overhead. If things went south, they would drop towards their targets; if conditions cooled off, they could be splashed into the ocean for possible recovery. Apart from violating the 1967 Outer Space Treaty prohibiting nuclear weapons in space, such a plan would look like an attack whether or not the warheads came down. ICBMs could be mounted in capsules attached to small diesel submarines that patrolled American coastal waters. When called upon, these capsules would bob to the surface and launch their cargoes. However, the U.S. Navy already had missile subs and the new subs wouldn't be cheap. Small subs in shallow waters were also vulnerable to nuclear explosions. Two ideas dispensed with the subs and stuck the missiles right in the water by themselves. The “Hydra” plan envisioned floating waterproof missiles bobbing in the brine just below the surface, deployed by ships and subs either in peacetime or upon warning. An unattained missile buoy is vulnerable to everything from naval units to fishermen to sea life. And as the report states, "The Hydra concept also presents safety problems of an unprecedented kind. The idea of missiles with nuclear warheads floating unattended in ocean waters introduces an unacceptable hazard to navigation for the world's shipping." The “Orca” concept actually proved itself during quarter-scale tests conducted by General Dynamics. A direct predecessor of DARPA's Upward Falling Payloads program, Orca envisioned encapsulated ICBMs resting dormant on the ocean floor until commanded to blow their ballast, surface and launch their contents. As with orbital basing, treaties prevent deployment of nukes on the ocean floor, and inspection would be detectable. If floating missiles entered Navy turf, perhaps missiles could fly instead. Several basing ideas envisioned large carrier aircraft disgorging their ICBMs in flight. Launching an ICBM in mid-air sounds crazy, but it worked in tests; in fact, in the early 1960s, the USAF and Britain's Ministry of Defense collaborated on such a missile, called Skybolt. (Its cancellation left the United Kingdom without an ICBM force.) Even giant seaplanes and zeppelins were considered for the carrier role. Seaplanes face corrosion and rough seas, and the thought of a nuclear-armed dirigible crashing in a cornfield gives one pause. Air-basing options all depended upon sufficient warning to get the aircraft airborne before combat, and it all looked very costly. For the nuclear triad to have three independent legs, land basing was essential. ICBMs, big or small, might be buried deep or driven around to keep them safe. Missile silos in themselves would only become more vulnerable as Soviet missiles increased in accuracy. The "Sandy Silo" concept put the encapsulated missile in a 2000-foot-deep hole filled with sand. Upon launch, water fluidized the sand and the buoyant missile would shoot to the surface and fly away. That is, if the sand hadn't been turned to glass first and the water didn't boil away. One idea was to bury the whole missile complex 3000 feet under a solid-rock mountain. The "Citadel" concept offered great survivability, and using abandoned mines could reduce the high costs involved. However, the Soviets could target the missile launch portals and seal them up. Citadels faced three big problems: command and control, dig-out and testing. Antennas or other communications gear connecting the citadel would likely be wiped out in the first assault. Tunnel- boring machines and pre-dug tunnels could open exits for weapons and personnel but would take a long time to do so—time not available during Armageddon. One would like to know this all worked before committing time and money, so nuclear testing of a citadel would be required. Once again, treaties foreclosed that possibility. Instead of digging up an entire mountain, perhaps it could be used as a shield. ICBMs flying from the USSR would have come from the north over the Pole; placing silos on the south faces on mesas and mountains would offer protection from the incoming warheads. But sub-launched missiles can come from any direction, and suitable south-facing sites are pretty scarce—some sit in national parks. Moving Missiles The wackiest concepts involved moving ICBMs around a lot. Mobile missiles are hard to target and dispersing them reduces their vulnerability to attack. Several transporter-erector-launcher (TEL) designs looked to trundle ICBMs along highways and across open terrain. If the thought of MIRVed nuclear missiles passing you on the interstate unnerves you, consider the off-road alternative: "Studies revealed a requirement for over 400,000 square miles of operating area, which exceeds the total land area controlled by the Department of Defense and the Bureau of Land Management of the Department of Interior . . . and certainly more than the combined area of military bases in the southwestern U.S." Those huge vehicles would scar the Western landscape something fierce. How about a hovercraft? It sounds like something a fiction writer came up with, but large hovercraft would cause less environmental damage. They would generate huge amounts of blowing dust and even minor obstacles like fences could impede movement. And like other dash-on-warning systems, hovercraft require advance notice to deploy safely. Another idea was to have amphibious gas-turbine-powered TELs randomly hiding in giant pools of opaquely-dyed water placed across the landscape. The pools offered some blast protection as well as concealment. Just where all this water was to come from was left unexplained. However goofy, the pool shelter concept shared its multiple-shelters-for-one-missile with other shell-game designs. Soviet satellites and spies might count the shelters, but wouldn't know which shelters held ICBMs. Noting that most of a missile's cost and complexity lies in its upper sections, one study even suggested leaving the rockets in the silos and shuttling their noses around. If burying the missiles in shelters was good, why not bury the whole shell game? A vast tunnel network could be excavated not far below the surface and special trains carrying the missiles could then move the weapons around out of sight. When called upon, the trains would stop and the missile launchers would ram their way through the earth to the surface. Analysts looked into a number of rail-mobile concepts besides subways. The Air Force later developed the Peacekeeper Rail Garrison just before the MX program was cancelled. The Soviets successfully deployed a few RT-23 ICBMs on their rail network, although not without difficulty. In the end, the Air Force selected a vast plan to build thousands of shelters and miles of track across Nevada and Utah for the MX Peacekeeper missile. Its $37 billion cost and the 4000 square miles of desert needed shocked even Republican senators. Congress vetoed the "racetrack" basing and settled on sticking the fifty MXs purchased in existing Minuteman silos. Neither the MX's numbers nor survivability matched the original weapons concept, and a decade after the START II treaty was signed, the big missiles stood down. As debate swirls around upgrading the nuclear triad, ICBMs struggle to keep their place in America's arsenal. Russian and Chinese ICBMs have become ever more accurate. Huge zany basing schemes are even less affordable now than when the MX was developed. Sub-launched missiles are accurate enough for counterforce targeting. If the USAF wants to keep its ICBM force, it must find a basing mode that works. Steve Weintz is a writer, filmmaker, artist, animator. Former firefighter, archaeologist, stuntman. http://nationalinterest.org/feature/are-americas-long-range-ballistic-missiles-doomed-13436 Return to Top

Issue No.1176, 30 July 2015 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama http://cpc.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7226