CUWS) Outreach Journal

USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies (CUWS) Outreach Journal

CUWS Outreach Journal 1248 20 January 2017

Feature Item: “North Korea’s Yongbyon Nuclear Facility: Possible Resumption of Operations at the 5 MWe Plutonium Production Reactor.” A 38 North exclusive with analysis by Joseph S. Bermudez Jr.; Published by 38 North.org; 18 January 2017. http://38north.org/2017/01/yongbyon011817/ Commercial satellite imagery collected from October 2016 through January 2017 indicates that Pyongyang’s campaign to reprocess plutonium wound down at the end of last year and that the North may now be preparing to resume operations at the 5 MWe plutonium production reactor, which ceased operations in late-2015. Stepped-up activities throughout the Yongbyon Nuclear Scientific Research Center indicate that it is operating at a level somewhat above what has been observed during the past five years and that may continue into the future. The exact implications of that activity remain unclear except to reaffirm that the Yongbyon facility remains the center of North Korea’s nuclear program.

U.S. Nuclear Weapons 1. Nuclear Stockpile About to Go Leaderless, Senator Warns Trump

U.S. Counter-WMD 1. Japan Eyes 3rd Prong in Missile Defense with THAAD System 2. The Fate of THAAD Will Depend on the Next Election 3. At Naval Site, Ban Ki-moon Plugs Thaad 4. THAAD Decision Made Hastily: Moon 5. Thaad Site Acquisition has been Delayed 6. White House Reiterates THAAD Won't Affect China's Capabilities

U.S. Arms Control 1. Trump Calls for Nuclear Arms Reduction Deal with Russia in Return for Easing Sanctions 2. Russia Won’t Trade Security for Lifting of Sanctions – Senator 3. New US-Russian Nuclear Arms Reduction Treaty 'Possible Under Three Conditions' 4. Russian Military Conducts Successful Test Launch of Topol-M Ballistic Missile (VIDEO) 5. Chinese President Xi Jinping Calls for Nuclear Disarmament 6. Kremlin Rejects Obama’s Claims that Russia is Reluctant to Conduct Nuclear Disarmament 7. Russia to Conduct Flight Test of Missile for ‘Nuclear Train’ in 2019

Asia/Pacific 1. N. Korea's Test of KN-08 or KN-14 ICBMs Likely to End in Failure: Expert 2. N.K. Will Continue to Launch Rockets to Place Satellites into Orbit: Report 3. S. Korea Should Consider Nuke Armament Option: Expert 4. North Korea Might Test-Launch ICBM as soon as Friday: South Korean Media 5. NK Has Likely Built 2 ICBMs, Placed Them on Mobile Launchers: Sources 6. Seoul to Give Up North Denuclearization Policy 7. N. Korea Repeats Threat to Test ICBM 8. S. Korea, US, Japan Kick Off Maritime Drill to Counter NK Missiles

Middle East 1. Deputy FM: Iran Vigorously Going on with Its Legitimate Nuclear Program 2. AEOI Chief: Iran to Import 130 Tons of Uranium Soon 3. AEOI Deputy: Iran Capable of Returning to Pre-Deal Nuclear Status 4. Obama: No Regret for ‘Red Line’ over Syria 5. Iran Removes ‘Excess Centrifuges’ from Fordow Site, IAEA’s Amano Confirms 6. Armed Forces Spox.: Defensive Issues Never Part of JCPOA 7. Rouhani: Fresh Talks on JCPOA 'Meaningless' 8. AEOI Chief's Aide: Iran to Inject UF6 into Advanced Home-Made IR8 Centrifuges Soon 9. Iran Does Not Take Trump’s Stance on JCPOA Seriously: AEOI’s Salehi

India/Pakistan 1. US Monitoring 50 Pakistani Entities Due to Fears over Country's Missile Capabilities – Report 2. Pakistan Vows Nuclear Retaliation if India Attacks

Commentary 1. China’s Aircraft Carrier Poised to Sail Further 2. Russia, Military Modernization and Lowering the Nuclear Threshold 3. Mattis Talks Nukes, But Is Trump Listening? 4. Why THAAD in South Korea is a Red Line for China 5. The Nuclear Sea Leg

Return to Top

Defense News – Springfield, VA Nuclear Stockpile About to Go Leaderless, Senator Warns Trump By Joe Gould January 19, 2017 January 19, 2017 WASHINGTON — US Sen. Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., is warning the new administration that unless it acts, an agency managing the nation’s nuclear stockpile will go leaderless after Friday’s inauguration. Heinrich, a member of the Senate Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee, sent President- elect Donald Trump a letter Tuesday urging him to keep senior officials in sensitive national security posts — including National Nuclear Security Administration leaders — until their replacements are in place. Heinrich noted only six of 58 presidentially appointed Pentagon officials are known to have been asked to stay in their positions through the transition process. Also, the NNSA leads, retired Lt. Gen. Frank Klotz and Madelyn Creedon, have not been asked to stay on, he said. “This will be the first time in NNSA’s 16-year history, through four different administrations, in which there will not be any continuity in leadership during a presidential transition,” Heinrich said in the letter. He added, “We simply cannot afford to allow national security positions to effectively run on ‘auto-pilot.’ The responsibilities are too important.” Political appointees of an outgoing presidential administration are typically asked to resign when a new president is elected, but appointees in key positions are often asked to stay until a new president can replace or choose to keep them. Rick Perry, President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the U.S. Department of Energy, told lawmakers at his Senate confirmation hearing Thursday that the head of the NNSA and his top deputy should remain on the job until their replacements are named. “I have sat down with the general [Klotz] and had a good conversation with him, and have sent the message that it would certainly be my desire to have that continuity,” Perry said. “It is in the president-elect's office now and hopefully we will see that type of continuity in those very important places." On Thursday, Trump spokesman Sean Spicer said at a news briefing that 50 government employees in critical posts have been asked to stay on, including Deputy Defense Secretary Bob Work; Brett McGurk, the special envoy for the global coalition to counter ISIS, and Dab Kern, the deputy assistant to the president and director of the White House Military Office. “The president-elect understands how it is important to ensure the continuity of government,” Spicer said. He did not mention the NNSA, and the transition team did not immediately respond to a request for comment. http://www.defensenews.com/articles/nuclear-stockpile-about-to-go-leaderless-senator-warns- trump Return to Top Issue No.1248, 20 January 2017 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies CUWS Outreach Journal Maxwell AFB, Alabama

The Asahi Shimbun – Tokyo, Japan Japan Eyes 3rd Prong in Missile Defense with THAAD System By RYO AIBARA, Staff Writer January 14, 2017 GUAM, United States--North Korean missiles raining down on Tokyo and other cities is a scenario that Japanese defense officials are now grappling with in light of a spike in tests by the reclusive state. That is why Defense Minister Tomomi Inada visited Andersen Air Force Base here Jan. 13 for a briefing on the state-of-the-art Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system (THAAD) developed by the U.S. military. Japan currently relies on a two-pronged approach for missile defense, but is considering adding a third element because of the rapid advances in missile technology by North Korea. After her 40-minute tour, during which U.S. military officials explained the functions of the THAAD, Inada told reporters, "With the threat from North Korea's nuclear missiles entering a new stage, I was able to personally view what could become a new asset for Japan's missile defense." Japan's current missile defense involves a two-tiered system. Outside of the atmosphere, SM-3 interceptor rockets launched by Aegis vessels would target ballistic missiles, while surface-to-air PAC-3 missiles would be aimed at the ballistic missiles once they re-enter the atmosphere. Based on the Medium-term Defense Program for the period from fiscal 2014 until fiscal 2018, the number of Aegis destroyers capable of carrying SM-3 rockets will double from the current four. Improvements will also be made on the SM-3 and PAC-3 missiles to expand the range over which they can shoot down ballistic missiles. In 2016, North Korea fired more than 20 ballistic missiles into the Sea of Japan. Five types were tested, including a submarine-launched missile. That technology caught Japanese defense officials off-guard, said a high-ranking source, citing assessments that North Korea had not yet reached that level of sophisticated technology. Those developments led to calls within the ministry to push for the introduction of the THAAD system because it is capable of intercepting missiles moving at far higher trajectories and even outer space. "If a missile fell on Japan, it would cause irreparable damage," said a ministry official. "We have to fill in any 'holes' by moving to a three-tier approach." A major hurdle for deploying the THAAD is cost. Putting the system into play would require hundreds of billions of yen, which may be beyond what the Finance Ministry would sanction given the nation's tight fiscal crunch. "It would be impossible to respond if North Korea launched dozens of missiles simultaneously," said a former defense minister. "There would be no end in sight if we started strengthening our ballistic missile defense." Another factor in Japan's thinking is the reaction from its neighbors if Tokyo embarks on this course.

The U.S. military's decision in 2016 to deploy the THAAD in South Korea promoted a harsh reaction from China and Russia. Beijing and Moscow cited concerns about the highly advanced radar used in the THAAD to monitor the movements of their own military forces. When Russian President Vladimir Putin met with Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in December, he raised the issue of Japan's aims for ballistic missile defense. However, after her THAAD inspection, Inada told reporters, "We should think about what would be most appropriate for protecting Japan." http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/AJ201701140038.html Return to Top

The Hankyoreh – Seoul, South Korea The Fate of THAAD Will Depend on the Next Election By Lee Je-hun, staff reporter January 15, 2017 It is impossible to deploy THAAD before South Koreans vote in a new leader, and decision could be changed The deployment of the THAAD missile defense system with US troops in South Korea is once against becoming a hot issue. The increasing uncertainty resulting from the impeachment of South Korea’s president is functioning as a catalyst. The US, apparently rattled, is calling for early deployment. China is attempting to prevent the deployment from being completed while President Park Geun-hye is still in office and hopes to make arrangements with the next South Korean administration, which will be probably be chosen in an early presidential election. South Korea is the proverbial shrimp, its back in danger of being broken in a battle between whales. What should South Korea choose? Let’s start by looking at movements in the US. During the “two plus two” meeting (of top diplomats and defense officials) between the US and South Korea on Oct. 19, 2016, US Secretary of State John Kerry promised to deploy THAAD in South Korea as soon as possible. During a luncheon organized by the Association of the Republic of Korea Army on Nov. 4, Vincent Brooks, commander of US Forces Korea and Combined Forces Command, suggested that the THAAD battery could be deployed in South Korea within eight or ten months. When a reporter asked Brooks after a meeting with South Korean Defense Minister Han Min-koo at the Defense Ministry on Dec. 13 whether he thought the THAAD deployment would be delayed because of the domestic political situation, Brooks replied that he did not think so. This prediction implies that Brooks does not intend to let the National Assembly’s passage of the motion of impeachment against Park on Dec. 9 result in the delay of the THAAD deployment. During a meeting with First Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Lim Sung-nam and Defense Ministry Policy Director Ryu Je-seung on Dec. 20, Michael Flynn, who has been nominated to serve as National Security Advisor when President-Elect Donald Trump takes office on Jan. 20, praised the decision to deploy THAAD as symbolizing the strength of the alliance between the two countries. The US is currently absorbed in rushing to carry out the THAAD deployment.

Korea JoongAng Daily – Seoul, South Korea At Naval Site, Ban Ki-moon Plugs Thaad Comments suggest ex-UN chief is shaping his image on defense BY KANG JIN-KYU January 16, 2017 Former UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon threw his weight behind the installation of a U.S. advanced missile defense system on Sunday in a move to woo security-sensitive conservatives in what is seen as his journey toward the Blue House. During his visit to the Navy’s 2nd Fleet Command in Pyeongtaek in Gyeonggi, 60 kilometers (37 miles) south of Seoul, the former UN chief said Seoul needs to set up the U.S.-made missile defense system on its soil to protect itself from North Korea’s provocations, adding the missile was purely defense in nature, a remark apparently intended to appease Beijing’s anger toward the deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (Thaad) system in Seongju County, North Gyeongsang, set to be complete by the end of this year. “When we look at what led us to decide on the Thaad deployment, it was due to the North’s persistent efforts to develop nuclear and ballistic missile programs. The deployment was therefore in purely defensive nature as far as I am concerned,” said the apparent presidential aspirant, who has yet to declare a bid amid growing speculation he will soon do so. “We wouldn’t need the Thaad system if our national security had not been under threat from North Korea,” said the 72-year old lifelong diplomat. He also said the Park Geun-hye government made the right decision to deploy Thaad as the country was “in a quasi state of war” with Pyongyang in what is seen as his strongest remark on national security that is certain to please security- conscious, anti-Pyongyang conservative voters. The fact that he made the remark at the symbolic place, where the wreckage of the Cheonan warship is on display, highlighting military threats posed by the North suggests that Ban made a calculated comment to shape his image as someone who is tough on national security and North Korea. The Cheonan warship was torpedoed and cut in half by a North Korean submarine on March 26, 2010, killing 46 sailors inside. On growing protest and economic retaliations imposed by Beijing since Seoul’s decision on the Thaad deployment in July last year, Ban said the conflict with Beijing could be resolved “through diplomacy,” without elaborating. Upset by Seoul’s decision on Thaad, which Beijing sees as a cover by Washington to look into its airspace territory using Thaad’s powerful X-band radar, Beijing has been reducing the number of Chinese tourists coming to Korea and banning imports of some Korean cosmetics. It is also limiting the airing of Korean television shows and unofficially blacklisting Korean entertainment figures from working. The latest anti-Seoul measure involves a tightened Visa application requirement for South Koreans in which Beijing bans the use of pictures with applicants wearing glasses. Ban’s open endorsement for the antimissile defense system came amid growing calls from the opposition that the deployment decision should be deferred to the next administration. Moon Jae- in, the presidential frontrunner of the Minjoo Party, said in an interview with local media Friday that the matter should be dealt with by the next administration and the decision to set up Thaad

The Korea Times – Seoul, South Korea THAAD Decision Made Hastily: Moon By Jun Ji-hye January 16, 2017 Moon Jae-in, a leading presidential hopeful, has expressed a cautious view on deploying a U.S. antimissile battery here, saying the Park Geun-hye administration's decision in July last year was too "hasty and unilateral." Moon said he believes the government should have first sought approval from the National Assembly before signing the deal with the United States. He said the next South Korean leader should seek renegotiations with Washington, if possible, in consideration of the protests from China and a division in the country over the deployment. "As the agreement has already been reached between the allies, it is very complicated to discuss the issue again," he said in a book to be published today. The book, "A completely new nation — questions from the Republic of Korea and answers from Moon Jae-in," contains his future vision for the nation. Moon's aides said there is a misunderstanding in the global media about his point of view on the deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system. "Moon has been known as an opponent, but he actually doesn't have a clear yes or no," an aide told The Korea Times on condition of anonymity. "He believes that the matter should be re-discussed between Seoul and Washington on condition that it does not hurt their strong alliance. That's because there has been a huge protest from China and confusion in Korean society." In the book, Moon criticized Park for rushing into the deal despite mounting protests from local residents as well as from China, saying the issue should be handed over for the next government to reconsider. Moon, the former chairman of the main opposition Democratic Party of Korea (DPK), made the comments after Park was impeached by the National Assembly, Dec. 9, in a high-profile corruption and influence-peddling scandal. His position has been construed as signaling that he is opposed to THAAD and would retract the deployment decision if elected president. Regarding this, Moon explained Sunday that his calls for handing the issue over to the next government was not to reverse the deployment decision, but to make a "rational decision" after having various debates including diplomatic consultations. Issue No.1248, 20 January 2017 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies (CUWS) Outreach Journal

"I am demanding neither the enforcement nor the withdrawal of the deployment plan," he told reporters. "I am just calling for the issue to be debated by the next government to come up with a rational decision." Moon added that he did not think the Seoul-Washington agreement on the deployment of the battery could be canceled easily. But he immediately faced criticism from his political rivals for "changing his words." Seoul Mayor Park Won-soon, also a presidential hopeful of the DPK, said Moon should stop changing his words based on political calculations. "It is true that the U.S. is the nation's biggest ally, but a politician should be able to say no if that is the right thing to do," he said on Facebook. "A politician who only reads the countenance of the U.S. is unqualified to protect our national interest." Park made it clear that he is opposed to THAAD, citing that the battery does not protect Seoul and its surrounding areas because of its range, and that the deployment will only worsen Seoul-Beijing relations, which will negatively affect the country's economy. Seongnam Mayor Lee Jae-myung, another DPK presidential hopeful, also said Moon's flip-flop on the issue, which has a profound effect on the nation, is only confusing liberal voters. "Moon should explain why he changed his position from against to for," he said. In response, an aide to Moon, who asked not to be named, said that Moon has not changed his position and that he has never placed emphasis on the deployment or the withdrawal. "Moon has just called for a more deliberate process on THAAD," he said. In the book, Moon noted that the Park government failed to sufficiently review whether the THAAD deployment would result in the nation joining the U.S.-led missile defense system (MD) and whether the deployment would provoke protests from China. "The utility of THAAD has yet to be proven even in the U.S.," he said. "I would say the only effects from the deployment could be reducing people's anxiety here and pressuring North Korea to some extent." Meanwhile, the Ministry of National Defense said Monday that the military's acquisition of a golf course operated by Lotte Group for the THAAD placement may be delayed due to administrative reasons. "The administrative process is underway to secure the Lotte Skyhill Country Club in Seongju in exchange for a piece of state-owned military land," said spokesman Moon Sang-gyun. "But the swap deal, originally scheduled to be completed by January, may be pushed back a bit due to the need to follow a set process by Lotte." Sources noted that Lotte is delaying holding a board of directors meeting to sign off on the deal due to concerns over possible retaliatory actions against the company by China.

Korea JoongAng Daily – Seoul, South Korea Thaad Site Acquisition has been Delayed Lotte needs to hold a board meeting, but worries about China BY SARAH KIM January 17, 2017 The Ministry of National Defense said Monday it may face a delay in the acquisition of Lotte’s golf course in Seongju County, North Gyeongsang, the site where the U.S.-led Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (Thaad) system is to be deployed. A deal to swap the Lotte Skyhill Seongju Country Club with government land in Namyangju, Gyeonggi, was originally scheduled to be completed this month, said Moon Sang-gyun, spokesman of the Defense Ministry, but may be delayed because of Lotte’s “internal situation.” “We said previously that the land swap would happen within January,” said Moon in a briefing, “but there is a possibility this can be slightly delayed.” Lotte has yet to convene a board of directors meeting giving the final okay to swap the golf course for the military land, apparently concerned over possible retaliatory measures against the company by China, which objects to the Thaad deployment. Since last month, Lotte Group has been the target of a series of harsh probes by Chinese authorities including a tax audit in Shanghai, all seen as Beijing’s retaliatory measures for the Seongju golf course arrangement. “Lotte has to hold a board meeting and approve the final appraisal, but a meeting of the board of directors has not yet been held,” elaborated Moon. “I believe it will be held soon.” But he did not specify an exact timeline. Appraisal of the plots of land was completed last week. “Currently, the administrative procedures are underway for the contract [to swap the plots of land], but the schedule is more or less flexible,” he said. When asked if the Defense Ministry has requested Lotte to hold a board of directors meeting as soon as possible, Moon responded “That is Lotte’s internal affairs, so we are hoping that everything will go as planned as much as possible.” He likewise said to a question as to whether Defense Minister Han Min-koo plans on meeting with Lotte Group Chairman Shin Dong-bin over the matter, “Negotiations are currently underway, so it will not be appropriate to comment on this.” Seoul and Washington in July announced they will deploy a Thaad battery in South Korea to counter Pyongyang’s missile threats and decided upon Seongju County as the optimum location. But

Seongju residents protested the deployment, especially concerned about health and environmental effects of the electromagnetic waves emitted from the battery’s powerful AN/TPY-2 radar. On Sept. 20, the Defense Ministry finally decided upon the rural golf course as the new location for the Thaad battery and entered negotiations with Lotte International, its operator, in October. In November, the ministry announced it agreed with Lotte International, to exchange the land for the government plot in Namyangju. But since the announcement, Lotte Group, the nation’s fifth largest conglomerate, has become the target of a Chinese crackdown. Some 150 of its factories, storage facilities and stores of Lotte affiliates in the country came under scrutiny, including units of Lotte Confectionery, Lotte Chemical, Lotte Department Store and Lotte Mart. The crackdown also included a tax audit of the Lotte Group’s Shanghai headquarters. Lotte was originally scheduled to hold a board meeting on Jan. 3 but has been putting off the meeting. China has strongly protested the deployment of Thaad in Korea, saying it goes against its national strategic interests. It is especially wary of the X-band radar, which it thinks will be used by the United States to spy on it despite Washington claiming it will limit its range to monitor North Korea. Lotte Group officially claims “time is needed because there are many things the board of directors has to review.” But a source from within the conglomerate told the JoongAng Ilbo Monday, “When taking into consideration domestic business, we need to swap the plots of land with the Defense Ministry right away, but we cannot turn our back on business with China. Thaad is a dilemma for Lotte.” After the golf course is acquired by the military, it will be transferred to the U.S. Forces Korea in accordance with the Status of Forces Agreement, or SOFA, between the two countries. http://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/news/article/article.aspx?aid=3028753&cloc=joongangdaily %7Chome%7Cnewslist1 Return to Top

Yonhap News Agency – Seoul, South Korea White House Reiterates THAAD Won't Affect China's Capabilities January 18, 2017 WASHINGTON, Jan. 17 (Yonhap) -- The White House said Tuesday the THAAD missile defense system the U.S. is going to deploy in South Korea is a purely defensive system having no impact on China's capabilities. "The United States has made clear that the deployment of a THAAD battery to South Korea would be focused solely on countering the missile threat that emanates from North Korea," White House press secretary Josh Earnest said in his last press briefing. THAAD will enhance the U.S. ability to fulfill its commitment to defend the South, he said. "We've explained that to the Chinese at the highest levels and you know we'll continue to go to great lengths to help them understand exactly what we are trying to do," Earnest said. "There have been some conversations through diplomatic channels and military channels to try to ease the Issue No.1248, 20 January 2017 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies CUWS Outreach Journal Maxwell AFB, Alabama concerns of the Chinese that that's focused on North Korea and not on having any impact on China's capabilities." South Korea and the U.S. decided last year to deploy a THAAD unit to the South to defend better against North Korean missiles. China has claimed THAAD poses a threat to its security interests despite repeated assurances from Seoul and Washington that it's purely a defensive system. Earnest also said that the outgoing administration has been working closely with the incoming administration "on a range of issues, including on North Korea." "So I am confident that this challenge is on the radar screen of the incoming president and his team," he said. He acknowledged that the administration of President Barack Obama has not made "as much progress as we would have liked in halting North Korea's nuclear activities that are in violation of a range of international agreements." But he stressed that the U.S. has succeeded in building "a rock-solid international consensus" about putting additional pressure on Pyongyang to refrain from destabilizing and provocative actions. "That's an important step and will serve the incoming administration well as they work on this challenge," he said. Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes said the North will be a "predominant challenge for the next team." Rhodes also stressed the importance of a "constructive relationship" with China that "can lead to some more assertive action on their part." "I think they're worried about the uncertainties of destabilization on the Korean peninsula that might come from pressure that they may apply," he said during a Foreign Press Center briefing. "The status quo is frankly more destabilizing than the alternative of them applying even greater pressure." http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/northkorea/2017/01/18/0401000000AEN2017011800045131 5.html Return to Top

Sputnik International – Russian Information Agency Trump Says Lifting Anti-Russian Sanctions May Be Possible 16 January 2017 US President-elect Donald Trump has suggested that anti-Russian sanctions could be lifted in exchange for a bilateral agreement on reducing nuclear weapons. Trump said US sanctions against Russia could be lifted for a bilateral agreement on reducing nuclear weapons arsenals. The arsenals should be reduced substantially, the President-elect noted in an interview with The Times newspaper. "For one thing, I think nuclear weapons should be way down and reduced very substantially, that’s part of it. But Russia’s hurting very badly right now because of sanctions, but I think something can happen that a lot of people are gonna benefit," Trump said in the interview.

Trump noted in the interview to the newspaper that such an approach would result in "de- escalating international tensions". The relations between Moscow and the West soured after Washington, Brussels and their allies accused Russia of fuelling tensions in eastern Ukraine and introduced a series of sanctions against Russia as a punitive measure. Moscow denied any involvement in the Ukrainian conflict and introduced counter-sanctions. The latest sanctions were proposed by the United States as a retaliation for Russia's alleged meddling in US presidential elections, a claim that Moscow has repeatedly denied. https://sputniknews.com/politics/201701161049623272-trump-russia-sanctions-lift-nuclear- arsenal/ Return to Top

RT (Russia Today) – Moscow, Russia Russia Won’t Trade Security for Lifting of Sanctions – Senator 16 January 2017 The lifting of Western sanctions has no separate value and is not even a strategic goal that requires sacrifices in the sphere of strategic security, the head of the upper house’s Committee for International Relations says. “The cancelation of sanctions is definitely not an end in itself. It is not even a strategic goal for Russia that requires some sacrifice, especially in the sphere of security,” Senator Konstantin Kosachev was quoted as saying by RIA Novosti. “We consider the sanctions an ill legacy of the team that is departing from the White House, that should be made history along with this team,” he added. The comments came shortly after US President-elect Donald Trump said in an interview with the Times and Bild newspapers that Western sanctions against Russia could be lifted in exchange for some agreement on nuclear disarmament. However, Kosachev told reporters that he would not perceive this statement as some sort of an official proposal. He also noted that Trump’s words were part of a wider interview and therefore should be seen as contemplation on possible developments of Russia-US relations. Also, in Kosachev’s opinion, Trump was saying that the world has excessive quantities of nuclear weapons that should be cut. This is evident, because nuclear disarmament is a hot topic for Russia- US relations and US leaders often address it at the beginning of their terms. “The departing US leader also started with an attempt of a ‘reset’, symbolized by the so-called New START treaty,” he noted. The senator also explained that the real reason why these attempts had failed was the United States’ persistence in the realization of their global missile defense system and other US attempts to shift the strategic balance in their favor – the spreading of NATO infrastructure, development of precision conventional weapons and combat drones and also the militarization of space.

Sputnik International – Russian Information Agency New US-Russian Nuclear Arms Reduction Treaty 'Possible Under Three Conditions' 16 January 2017 US President-elect Donald Trump has indicated that Washington could lift sanctions imposed on Russia in exchange for a major nuclear arms reduction treaty. Defense analyst Igor Korotchenko told RIA Novosti that the deal could only be reached if the United States and its allies meet three conditions. "If the incoming US administration is truly willing to discuss nuclear arms cuts, then Russia is ready to take part in these talks on three conditions. The first one involves transporting all US tactical nuclear armaments from Europe back to the US," Korotchenko, chief editor of the Russian magazine National Defense, said. The US-built tactical nuclear bombs have recently made headlines when the US National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) announced that the B61-12 warhead life extension program (LEP) had entered the production engineering phase. This is the final stage before production, which is scheduled to begin in 2020. The bombs are stationed in Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Italy and Turkey. Under the second condition, the treaty will cover nuclear arsenals of the United States, the United Kingdom and France on the one hand and Russia's nuclear potential on the other, the expert explained. The third condition will see the United States sign a legally binding document limiting Washington's global missile defense initiative, Korotchenko said. This agreement will cover land bases, as well as the sea-based component of the program. In 2016, the US-built NATO-operated Aegis Ashore missile defense site became operational in Deveselu, Romania. The second Aegis Ashore base located in Redzikowo, Poland, is scheduled to be completed in 2018. The system is ostensibly aimed at protecting Washington's allies in Europe from the nuclear threat from Iran. Russia has voiced its deep concerns over the initiative's true goals, saying it is detrimental to regional security and stability. Korotchenko also said that the US will also have to pledge to refrain from deploying missile defense system to space. Issue No.1248, 20 January 2017 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies (CUWS) Outreach Journal

"These [three] issues could be combined into a single 'package' along with a new treaty on the reduction of strategic offensive arms," he said. "If they are part of the talks, then it clearly makes sense to conduct negotiations on nuclear arms cuts with the incoming US administration." Russia and the United States signed the latest nuclear arms reduction treaty, known as New START, in 2010. The agreement entered into force in 2011 and is expected to expire in a decade. Earlier on Monday, US President-elect Donald Trump spoke in favor of cutting nuclear armaments "very substantially," adding that "nuclear weapons should be way down." He also suggested that he will try to negotiate "some good deals with Russia," offering sanctions relief in exchange. Korotchenko brushed this idea off, saying that these issues should be addressed separately. "The issue of nuclear arms reduction, involving Russia and the United States, must be resolved without reference to partially lifting sanctions which Washington imposed on Russia," he said. https://sputniknews.com/politics/201701161049643073-us-russia-nuclear-weapons/ Return to Top

RT (Russia Today) – Moscow, Russia Russian Military Conducts Successful Test Launch of Topol-M Ballistic Missile (VIDEO) 17 January 2017 The Intercontinental ballistic missile, Topol-M, has blasted off from the Plesetsk’s rocket site soaring through almost all of the country and successfully hitting its target over the Kamchtka peninsula, Russia’s Defense Ministry has said. “The goal of the launch was to confirm the stability of flight and technical performance of this kind of intercontinental ballistic missile,” a statement published on the Defense Ministry website on Tuesday, January 17, said. “A training war-head has hit a hypothetical target with high precision at a firing ground at the Kamchatka peninsula,” the statement also said. A video supported the statement and shows the moment the door to the pit, where the missile was kept, opening up and the rocket rising up into the sky accompanied by powerful blasts and spurts of flames. The Russian Topol-M intercontinental ballistic missile, also known as RT-2PM2 or SS-27 “Sickle B”, is one of the most recent missiles of its kind activated by Russia. It’s reported maximum range is about 11,000 kilometers (6,835 miles). Topol-M carries a single warhead with yield of about an 800 kt, but it is also compatible with multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV) warheads. Topol-M is capable of carrying four to six warheads along with decoys, according to chief designer Yury Solomonov. The missile is 22.7m long with the body of the first stage having a diameter of 1.9m.

Deutsche Welle (DW) – Bonn, Germany Chinese President Xi Jinping Calls for Nuclear Disarmament 18 January 2017 Xi Jinping has called for a world without nuclear weapons in his address at the World Economic Forum. The Chinese president also spoke out in favor of a multilateral world based on equality among big and small countries. In a landmark address in Davos on Wednesday, Xi held a speech to campaign for nuclear disarmament and a global governance system based on equality among countries. "Nuclear weapons should be completely prohibited and destroyed over time to make the world free of them," he said in a 45-minute-long address. "We should reject dominance by one or several countries," he said, adding that big countries needed to treat their smaller counterparts as equals "instead of acting as a hegemon." "Sovereign equality is the most important rule," he continued. Speaking about his own country, Xi said, "we always put people's rights and interests above everything else and we have worked hard to develop and uphold human rights...China will never seek expansion, hegemony or sphere of influence." China has been accused of abusing human rights and stifling dissent among its dissidents. It has also been accused by its neighbors of having expansionist ambitions in the South China Sea. A new model for international relations Xi also said his country would build a new model for relations with the United States, partnership with Russia and cooperation for peace, growth and reform among different civilizations. He said the international community needed to cooperate rather than compete on new frontiers like the deep sea, the Polar Regions and outer space. However, the Chinese leader did not mention US President-Elect Donald Trump, who has emphasized the expansion of nuclear capability "until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes." Trump has also criticized China, accusing it of exploiting the US economically. Xi also called for unity on climate change, saying, "The Paris agreement is a milestone in the history of climate governance. We must ensure this endeavor is not derailed...China will continue to take steps to tackle climate change and fully honor its obligations." China is experiencing severe air pollution and is desperately taking up measures to improve air quality in its cities. (AFP, Reuters) http://www.dw.com/en/chinese-president-xi-jinping-calls-for-nuclear-disarmament/a-37184561 Return to Top

TASS Russian News Agency – Moscow, Russia Kremlin Rejects Obama’s Claims that Russia is Reluctant to Conduct Nuclear Disarmament Russia has always called for "proportional and fair nuclear disarmament," presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov said January 19, 2017 MOSCOW, January 19. /TASS/. The Kremlin disagrees with outgoing US President Barack Obama who has accused Russia of unwilling to cut nuclear potentials, presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov said. "We cannot agree with this statement of Mr. Obama," Peskov said, adding that "the Russian side has always called for proportional and fair nuclear disarmament." The Kremlin spokesman stressed that the nuclear disarmament "cannot be disproportional, it cannot and should not lead to a violation of nuclear parity that is critically important for ensuring global stability and security." "That’s why we cannot agree with this (statement of Obama), the Russian side has consistently taken a well-known position in this issue," Peskov said. http://tass.com/politics/925985 Return to Top

Sputnik International – Russian Information Agency Russia to Conduct Flight Test of Missile for ‘Nuclear Train’ in 2019 According to a defense industry source, Russia will carry out first flight tests of a missile for its revived combat railway-based ballistic missile systems in 2019. 19 January 2017 MOSCOW (Sputnik) – Russia will carry out first flight tests of a missile for its revived combat railway-based ballistic missile systems in 2019, a defense industry source said Thursday. "They will be carried out in two years, in 2019," the source told RIA Novosti. According to previous media reports, the new 'death' train, codenamed "Barguzin," is expected to carry six intercontinental ballistic missiles. https://sputniknews.com/russia/201701191049778679-russia-nuclear-missile-test/ Return to Top

The Korea Herald – Seoul, South Korea N. Korea's Test of KN-08 or KN-14 ICBMs Likely to End in Failure: Expert January 14, 2017 North Korea is likely to see its first test of the KN-08 or KN-14 intercontinental ballistic missile end in failure as the missiles have never been flight-tested, a US expert said,

Yonhap News Agency – Seoul, South Korea N.K. Will Continue to Launch Rockets to Place Satellites into Orbit: Report January 15, 2017 SEOUL, Jan. 15 (Yonhap) -- North Korea will continue to launch rockets capable of placing satellites into orbit despite objections raised by the international community, the country's largest newspaper said Sunday. In an article carried by the Rodong Sinmun, an organ of the ruling Workers' Party of Korea, the North claimed that the hostile policy stance of the United States toward the communist country will invariably fail. It said no matter who objects, Pyongyang will never end its space development program. The daily said that it is the firm resolve of the country to become the leader in the space exploration field. It then argued that launching rockets will further the well-being of the North Korean people and has nothing to do with ballistic missiles. "The U.S. has persistently used the United Nations to claim that our rocket launches are to test missiles, but this is not true and distorts its peaceful nature," the paper said. The U.N. has long banned the North from launching satellite-carrying rockets because it views such launches as tests to check its ability to make long-range missiles. Such missiles could be armed with nuclear warheads. Most experts point out that there is very little difference in technology that goes into making satellite rockets and missiles. The latest report comes after North Korean leader Kim Jong-un said in his New Year's message that his country has entered the final stage of preparations to test-fire an intercontinental ballistic missile. http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/northkorea/2017/01/15/0401000000AEN2017011500230031 5.html Return to Top

Yonhap News Agency – Seoul, South Korea S. Korea Should Consider Nuke Armament Option: Expert January 17, 2017 SEOUL, Jan. 17 (Yonhap) – There should be a policy review of South Korea's nuclear armament option in response to North Korea's evolving nuclear and missile threats, according to a professor at a Ministry of Foreign Affairs-run think tank on Tuesday. "(South Korea) is required to carry out an in-depth review of military countermeasures along with tougher diplomacy aimed at denuclearizing North Korea, given the North's absolute supremacy in military power that comes with its completion of nuclear armament," said Jun Bong-geun, who lectures at the Institute of Foreign Affairs and National Security, in a report on Korean security analysis for 2017.

North Korea's frequent tests of submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBM) and longer-range missiles last year sparked calls from the conservative block here for Seoul's own development of nukes. The government, however, has ruled out such possibilities, citing its international commitment for nonproliferation. The professor said Seoul has a growing need for military capabilities to eliminate North Korea's nuclear weapons in a preventive war, launch pre-emptive attacks on North Korea's nuclear facilities or intercept long-range North Korean missiles if they are fired, all because of Pyongyang's fast- advancing nuclear capabilities. "Having conducted two nuclear tests in 2016 and 24 missile test launches, the North's nuclear armament is believed to become operational as of early 2017," Jun assessed. "Going forward, North Korea is predicted to accelerate the production of additional nuclear materials in a bid to acquire the capability to launch a secondary nuclear retaliation attack in the shortest time possible," he said. Along the line, the North may also expedite production of sophisticated nuclear warheads, ballistic missiles and SLBM capabilities, he added. Jun also urged dramatic expansion of South Korea's diplomacy and security policy capabilities and personnel so the country can take the lead in responding to North Korea's nuclear ambitions. Jun's report does not officially represent the South Korean government, and the report was written after a seminar with academics in think tanks, held earlier in the month. http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/northkorea/2017/01/17/0401000000AEN2017011700480031 5.html Return to Top

The Korea Herald – Seoul, South Korea NK Has Likely Built 2 ICBMs, Placed Them on Mobile Launchers: Sources January 19, 2017 North Korea has probably built two missiles presumed to be intercontinental ballistic missiles and placed them on mobile launchers for test-firing in the near future, military officials said Thursday. The two missiles are estimated to not exceed 15 meters in length, making them shorter than the North's existing ICBMs, the 19-20 meter-long KN-08 and the 17-18 meter-long KN-14, the officials familiar with the matter told Yonhap News Agency. The North appears to have intentionally leaked the new missiles to send a "strategic message" to the incoming government of Donald Trump who takes office on Friday, they said.

The officials didn't provide the exact date for when the missiles were picked up by intelligence, although it is estimated that the US detected them on Monday when the US Navy hurriedly moved its sea-based X-band radar system to the western part of the Pacific Ocean from seas off Hawaii. Experts say the North is likely to fire off a new ballistic missile that flies some 2,500 kilometers and claim that it has succeeded in launching an ICBM. An ICBM usually has a range exceeding 5,500 kilometers. "It will take at least two to three years for Pyongyang to master ICBM capabilities and five more years before they can be deployed operationally," said Kim Dong-yeob, a professor at Kyungnam University's North Korean studies school. The North is widely expected to test-fire a missile when the Trump government outlines its policies toward the communist state or around the time of the annual Seoul-Washington joint military drill kickoff in March.

In his annual New Year's address, North Korean leader Kim Jong-un said the country had reached the "final stages" of ICBM development. President-elect Trump responded with a tweet two days later, saying the possibility of the North developing a nuclear weapon capable of reaching the US "won't happen!" Upping the ante, North Korea's foreign ministry said on Jan. 8 that the country can test an ICBM at any place and time if its leadership gives the order. North Korea conducted two nuclear tests last year alone following those in 2006, 2009 and 2013. It also launched more than 20 ballistic missiles including intermediate-range Musudan missiles and those launched from a submarine. The North's leader inspected launches of ballistic missiles and watched tests of a new engine for an ICBM and a solid-fuel rocket last year. (Yonhap) http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20170119000173 Return to Top

Korea JoongAng Daily – Seoul, South Korea Seoul to Give Up North Denuclearization Policy Realism forces gov’t to shift its emphasis to blocking WMD use By JEONG YONG-SOO, LEE SUNG-EUN and LEE CHUL-JAE January 20,2017 In the first major policy change about North Korea’s weapons of mass destruction in nearly a decade, Seoul will focus more on blocking Pyongyang from actually using the weapons instead of trying to deter their development. The change was described by an official from the South Korean government Thursday who requested anonymity due to the sensitivity of the issue.

Other possible dates suggested by the South’s Institute for National Security Strategy in a report that was released earlier this month are Feb. 16, the 75th anniversary of former leader Kim Jong-il’s birth, and April 15, the 105th anniversary of North Korean founder Kim Il Sung’s birth. North Korea celebrates significant anniversaries with displays of military prowess. http://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/news/article/article.aspx?aid=3028899&cloc=joongangdaily| home|top Return to Top

Yonhap News Agency – Seoul, South Korea N. Korea Repeats Threat to Test ICBM January 20, 2017 SEOUL, Jan. 20 (Yonhap) -- North Korea on Friday repeated its threat to test-fire an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) at any time and place ahead of the imminent launch of the Donald Trump administration. North Korean leader Kim Jong-un claimed in his New Year's address that his country has reached the final stage of ICBM development, followed by the foreign ministry's Jan. 8 assertion that Pyongyang can run an ICBM test at any time and place if its leader orders it. On Thursday, the South Korean military said the North has probably built two ICBMs and placed them on mobile launchers for a test in the near future. "An ICBM test-firing is a fair self-defense step to counter the U.S. threat of a nuclear war against us (the North) that nobody can argue," the Rodong Sinmun, a daily of the North's ruling Workers' Party, said in a commentary. The U.S. has nothing to say about whatever the North makes and tests to counter its nuclear blackmail, the daily said. "We don't care what others say, and our ICBM will be test-fired at a certain time and place which our leadership will decide." It's simply a robber's sophistry for the U.S., which conducted a Minuteman III ICBM test last year, to regard the North's ICBM test as a provocation and intimidation, the daily said. http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/northkorea/2017/01/20/46/0401000000AEN2017012000420 0315F.html Return to Top

In April 2009, North Korea launched long-range Taepodong-2 missile, about three months after US president Barack Obama took office. A month later, the reclusive regime conducted its second nuclear test. In October last year, the North conducted fifth nuclear test. “It is highly likely that North Korea would conduct the sixth nuclear test or long-range missile,” said Cheong Seong-chang, a senior researcher at the Sejong Institute. “I think they would fire the missile when they mark the birthday of former leader Km Jung-il on Feb. 16th.” http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20170120000608 Return to Top

Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA) – Tehran, Iran 15 January 2017 Deputy FM: Iran Vigorously Going on with Its Legitimate Nuclear Program Tehran, Jan 15, IRNA – Foreign Ministry Deputy for Legal and International Affairs Abbas Araqchi said Iran is vigorously continuing with its legitimate nuclear program, stressing that enrichment activities as well as research and development projects are progressing. Talking to reporters on Sunday, he said Iran is also working on advanced machines. He said the more advanced machines which are presently under examination will be implemented in due course of time. The official further noted that as already communicated to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Iran will be able to take on enrichment activities in an industrial scale in 15 years. The Arak reactor is undergoing modernization projects and will be replaced by a more advanced reactor so the Iranian nuclear program is planned to develop in a quite logical period of time, Araqchi added. He went on to note that Iran’s nuclear cooperation plans are also expanding, stressing that Iran has been invited to take part in the international program of nuclear infusion. He said Iran is working on building more power plants and new installations for its nuclear program as the outcome of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). http://www.irna.ir/en/News/82387867/ Return to Top

FARS News Agency – Tehran, Iran Sunday, January 15, 2017 AEOI Chief: Iran to Import 130 Tons of Uranium Soon TEHRAN (FNA)- Head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) Ali Akbar Salehi announced that the country will receive 130 tons of uranium in the near future to increase its reserves to 350 tons.

Mehr News Agency – Tehran, Iran AEOI Deputy: Iran Capable of Returning to Pre-Deal Nuclear Status Sunday, 15 January 2017 TEHRAN, Jan. 15 (MNA) – AEOI deputy Asghar Zarean said in case of any violations of the nuclear deal by other sides, Iran has the capability to return its nuclear industry to pre-JCPOA status. Speaking to reporters Saturday night, Deputy Head of the Atomic Energy Organization Asghar Zarean made the remark on the sidelines of visiting the country’s nuclear achievements at Natanz nuclear facilities in Isfahan. “We have made all the necessary predictions in case the Establishment comes to the conclusion that we need to go back to the pre-JCPOA conditions,” he said, while referring to the possibility of other sides’ violation of Iran’s nuclear deal. He went on to add, “today, thanks to the links established among various sections of the country’s nuclear industry with universities, we are capable of obtaining any amount of enrichment that we desire.” He maintained that the country has so far exported 70 tons of heavy water produced at Arak Heavy Water Reactor to the United States and Russia; “we received the money before the shipment was sent to the US,” he added. He also noted that the amount of heavy water sold to Russia will meet a part of the country’s need for 2017.

Stressing that Arak heavy water complex has the capacity of producing 20 tons of this product per year, he added “today, many European countries have voiced interest in purchasing Arak’s heavy water.” http://en.mehrnews.com/news/122708/Iran-capable-of-returning-to-pre-deal-nuclear-status Return to Top

The Japan News – Tokyo, Japan Obama: No Regret for ‘Red Line’ over Syria Agence France-Presse (AFP) January 16, 2017 WASHINGTON (AFP-Jiji) — U.S. President Barack Obama says he does not regret his speech drawing a “red line” over Syria’s use of chemical weapons, a phrase critics say symbolizes the U.S. failure to act over the country’s conflict. Obama made the comment in 2012 about possible US military action in Syria, saying “a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized.” In what was billed as his last network interview, on the CBS News program “60 Minutes” broadcast on Sunday — less than a week before his term ends Friday — Obama confirmed that he had ad- libbed phrase, which wasn’t in the text of his speech. “I don’t regret at all saying that if I saw [Syrian President] Bashar al-Assad using chemical weapons on his people that that would change my assessments in terms of what we were or were not willing to do in Syria,” he said. Challenged by his interviewer Steve Kroft that “you didn’t say that... you said — you drew the red line,” Obama declined to say whether he would take it back. “I think it was important for me as president of the United States to send a message that in fact there is something different about chemical weapons,” he added. “And regardless of how it ended up playing, I think in the Beltway, what is true is Assad got rid of his chemical weapons.” In 2013, the Syrian military used chemical weapons in an attack against rebel-controlled areas of Damascus, killing nearly 1,500 civilians, including more than 400 children. Wrenching video showing people foaming at the mouth and suffering other effects of an apparent chemical attack caused outrage around the world. But after it appeared the United States was preparing imminent air strikes against the Syrian government, Washington instead agreed to a last-minute, Moscow-brokered deal to send Syrian chemical weapons to Russia. Critics blame the decision for humiliating the White House, encouraging Russia to launch its own air strikes in Syria — which have shored up Assad and killed many civilians — and emboldening Moscow to ratchet up its confrontation with Washington. http://the-japan-news.com/news/article/0003462021 Return to Top

Tasnim News Agency – Tehran, Iran Iran Removes ‘Excess Centrifuges’ from Fordow Site, IAEA’s Amano Confirms January 16, 2017 TEHRAN (Tasnim) – Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Yukiya Amano said Tehran has removed sensitive equipment from the country’s Fordow nuclear facility, in compliance with a key commitment of its nuclear deal with six world powers. “Iran has removed excess centrifuges and infrastructure from the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant in line with its nuclear-related commitments under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA),” Amano said in a statement published on the official website of the IAEA on Monday. “The JCPOA required Iran, within one year from Implementation Day, to complete the removal of all excess centrifuges and infrastructure from the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant and to transfer them to storage at the Natanz Fuel Enrichment Plant under continuous Agency monitoring,” he added. The IAEA director general confirmed that “on 15 January 2017, the Agency verified that Iran has taken these actions related to Fordow” and that “Iran has carried out these steps within the timeframe stipulated under the JCPOA.” Iran and the Group 5+1 (Russia, China, the US, Britain, France, and Germany) reached the nuclear deal in July 2015 and implemented it in January last year. https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/2017/01/16/1298591/iran-removes-excess-centrifuges- from-fordow-site-iaea-s-amano-confirms Return to Top

Mehr News Agency – Tehran, Iran Armed Forces Spox.: Defensive Issues Never Part of JCPOA Monday, 16 January 2017 TEHRAN, Jan. 16 (MNA) – Deputy Chief of Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces has said some specific individuals have inaccurately criticized strengthening of country’s defense. Brig. Gen. Massoud Jazayeri told the media on Monday that Iran’s defensive programs would continue unhindered according to the defense doctrine guiding the general defense policies and would rely on indigenous capabilities; “today, defense sector enjoys better conditions than any other time; being located in a hostile region with ever-increasing threats makes it inevitable to strengthen the defense almost in a regular basis, on which the nation as well as high-ranking officials would agree unanimously,” he added. Jazayeri criticized calls by specific circles within the country to slow the pace of strengthening of the defense as misguided, and that they did not belong to the mainstream of the nation; “we believe there was no link between JCPOA and defensive issues and no defense topic was discussed during nuclear negotiations; this was a fact well-understood by parties to the negotiations as well as our negotiators,” he concluded. http://en.mehrnews.com/news/122768/Defensive-issues-never-part-of-JCPOA Return to Top

Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA) – Tehran, Iran 17 January 2017 Rouhani: Fresh Talks on JCPOA 'Meaningless' Tehran, Jan 17, IRNA – President Hassan Rouhani on Tuesday ruled out any new talks on Iran nuclear deal – known as JCPOA – as meaningless. Rouhani, who was speaking at a press conference on the one-year anniversary of JCPOA implementation, made the remarks in response to US president-elect Donald Trump's recent remarks about revision of the JCPOA. The JCPOA was agreed between Iran and the G5+1 (The US, the UK, Russia, China, France and Germany) in July 2015. It was later implemented on January 16, 2016. 'Mr. Trump has not expressed satisfaction with Iran nuclear deal so far and has said the deal is not a good deal,' the president said. 'These claims are nothing but a slogan,' Rouhani added. Noting that the JCPOA is not a bilateral accord, President Rouhani said the JCPOA has already been agreed upon and confirmed in the United Nations. On the probable influence of new US president in Iran's upcoming presidential election, Rouhani said the new president in the White House will have no influence in Iran's elections and the Iranian people will make their own decision. http://www.irna.ir/en/News/82391091/ Return to Top

FARS News Agency – Tehran, Iran Wednesday, January 18, 2017 AEOI Chief's Aide: Iran to Inject UF6 into Advanced Home-Made IR8 Centrifuges Soon TEHRAN (FNA)- Senior aide to the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) Asqar Zare'an announced that the country is preparing to inject gas into its latest generation of centrifuge machines, IR8, in the near future. "The mechanical tests of IR8 machine which has been made by Iranian experts and is fully indigenized have ended and we will inject uranium gas into a single machine within the framework of the nuclear deal in Natanz and under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in the very near future," Zare'an said on Wednesday. He stressed that the measure will increase the country's capability to enrich uranium, while it also sends a message to the world powers party to the 2015 nuclear deal that any violation of the agreement could convince Iran to revive its past nuclear operations with such a capability that it can replace the old centrifuge machines with advanced ones. Iran's plans to inject UF6 into IR8 machine had been earlier announced by AEOI Spokesman Behrouz Kamalvandi too.

Tasnim News Agency – Tehran, Iran Iran Does Not Take Trump’s Stance on JCPOA Seriously: AEOI’s Salehi January 18, 2017 TEHRAN (Tasnim) – Head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) Ali Akbar Salehi described US president-elect Donlad Trump’s stance on the 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and six world powers as “negative”. “(US president-elect Donald) Trump’s stance on the nuclear agreement is negative and we do not take it seriously”, Salehi said in an interview with Al Jazeera news network on Tuesday. Stressing that Iran will not be the first party to violate the accord, he added, “If Trump tears up the nuclear deal, we will not lose anything.” Washington should accept the responsibility of its actions if the deal is rejected, Salehi went on to add. In similar remarks on Tuesday, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani dismissed as absurd the idea that the nuclear deal, also known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), can be renegotiated. “(Holding) new negotiations (on the deal) is meaningless,” Rouhani said at a press conference in Tehran held on the first anniversary of the implementation of the nuclear agreement between Iran and the Group 5+1 (Russia, China, the US, Britain, France and Germany). He made the remarks in response to a question about Iran’s response to US President-elect Donald Trump who has threatened to either scrap the agreement or renegotiate it and seek a better deal.

Negotiations that led to the agreement took a long time, the Iranian president noted, adding that returning to the past will make no sense. “There will be no (new) negotiations on the JCPOA,” he underscored, adding that the deal has been reached and is virtually an international document. He also stressed that Trump’s remarks about the nuclear deal are just propaganda, adding that the next US president will not be able to abandon the deal unilaterally when he enters the White House. Rouhani went on to say that he believes it is unlikely to happen as the JCPOA is not a bilateral agreement. https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/2017/01/18/1300078/iran-does-not-take-trump-s- stance-on-jcpoa-seriously-aeoi-s-salehi Return to Top

International Business (IB) Times (U.K. Edition) – London, U.K. US Monitoring 50 Pakistani Entities Due to Fears over Country's Missile Capabilities – Report The companies and citizens have reportedly been involved in actions contrary to the US national security. By Nandini Krishnamoorthy January 14, 2017 Pakistan's missile capabilities are reported to have left the US extremely worried. The superpower is now keeping a close eye on nearly 50 entities in the nuclear-armed state for potential threats. The rising fears are thought to have been the reason for the Obama administration to impose trade restrictions on seven entities in the South Asian country, sources familiar with the development told India-based The Hindu newspaper. However, there has been no official announcement regarding the US monitoring 47 entities. The newspaper report cited its source as saying that there was a "reasonable cause to believe, based on specific and articulable facts," that those entities under check "have been involved in actions contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States". All the seven companies that face restrictions are reportedly linked to Islamabad's missile programmes. Besides that, 40 more entities have been added under strict watch of the US agencies, it has been reported. The entities put under trade restrictions by the US include the Islamabad-based National Engineering and Scientific Commission and its subsidiaries, Air Weapons Complex, Maritime Technology Complex and New Auto Engineering. Pakistan's recent successful launch of a cruise missile is thought to have ringed the alarm for the US. The missile, which was launched from a submarine last week, is reportedly the first time that the Pakistan army has test-fired a nuclear-capable missile from underwater. The Babur 3 missile, with a strike range of up to 450km, was fired off from an undisclosed location in the Indian Ocean, the latest in the arms race front in the sub-continent.

Financial Times – London, U.K. Pakistan Vows Nuclear Retaliation if India Attacks Threat follows confirmation of Delhi’s military assault plans in times of crisis By Kiran Stacey in New Delhi and Farhan Bokhari in Islamabad January 19, 201 Pakistani officials have threatened to use nuclear weapons should India invade, after India’s new army chief admitted to secret military plans for attacking its neighbour in the event of a crisis. Three officials in Islamabad told the Financial Times that Pakistan would take all necessary measures to defend itself should India ever put into action long-rumoured “cold-start” plans to attack Pakistani territory following an event such as a major terrorist incident. “If ever our national security is threatened by advancing foreign forces, Pakistan will use all of its weapons — and I mean all of our weapons — to defend our country,” one of the officials said. The comments come two weeks after Bipin Rawat, the newly appointed head of the Indian army, acknowledged the existence of “cold start”. The cold-start strategy is designed to enable an instant response to crises including attacks by militants launched from Pakistani soil, and would mean Indian troops entering Pakistan and occupying positions along the border before Islamabad could prepare or the international community could intervene. According to a 2010 diplomatic cable from the then US ambassador in New Delhi released by WikiLeaks, the plan is designed to enable a rapid response to a crisis without threatening the survival of the Pakistani state — or triggering a nuclear response. Tensions between the two nuclear-armed neighbours have remained high since last September’s attack on the Indian army base at Uri in Kashmir, which killed 19 soldiers. India responded with what it called “surgical strikes” across the de facto border with Pakistan. Since then there have been more minor assaults. India’s National Investigation Agency on Thursday said the militant Islamist group Lashkar-e-Taiba was to blame for the Uri attack.

This month, meanwhile, Pakistan carried out its first test of a nuclear-capable missile from a submarine. The Uri attack has refocused Indian attention on how it responds to terror attacks that it believes originate from Pakistan, such as those in Mumbai in 2008 and at the Indian parliament in 2001. While India has never before acknowledged the cold-start retaliation doctrine, Pakistan has used rumours of its existence to justify keeping its defences high on the Indian border, even as its foreign partners have urged it to redeploy troops to fight Islamists elsewhere. “It is understandable in the wake of the surgical strikes that the Modi government would want to signal to Pakistan that all options are on the table in the event of another terror attack within India,” said Walter Ladwig, a lecturer in international relations at King’s College London. “However, reviving cold start — if that is what has happened — certainly escalates the rhetoric, and may raise unrealistic expectations domestically about India’s ability to respond to a new terror attack.” Mahmud Durrani, a former national security adviser to the Pakistani prime minister, said: “Pakistan already fears a rapid build-up of India’s conventional weapons. The danger is that with such warnings [of cold start], the escalatory ladder of going from conventional weapons to nuclear weapons for Pakistan will be shortened.” Western diplomats in Islamabad, however, doubt whether India would use the cold-start plan. “Right now, its more psychological,” said one. “But that’s not to say that we shouldn’t worry about this situation. India and Pakistan both have nuclear weapons. The textbook says two nuclear states cannot afford a war, but there is always uncertainty.” https://www.ft.com/content/889ebb80-dc9b-11e6-9d7c-be108f1c1dce Return to Top

Global Times – Beijing, China OPINION/Asian Review China’s Aircraft Carrier Poised to Sail Further By Li Jie; Source: Global Times January 15, 2017 China's aircraft carrier Liaoning has sailed through the first island chain for the first time in late December, signaling that the People's Liberation Army (PLA) Navy's exercises in the West Pacific Ocean are entering into a normalization stage. The breakthrough, however, is considered as just the beginning stage of the PLA Navy's sea operation in the region as more fleets of battleships led by carriers will sail into waters near and far in the future. The military drills, including going through the first island chain, are part of the PLA Navy's annual schedule and follow the routine of the navy's exercises. The move was accompanied by six H-6 bombers flying over the island chain. Such intensive exercises have been rarely observed before. Therefore, it is understandable that countries like the US, Japan and South Korea are wary of China's military operations in the region, especially after their attempt to contain China's military forces within the first island chain failed.

Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) – Canberra, Australia OPINION/Analysis Russia, Military Modernisation and Lowering the Nuclear Threshold By Malcolm Davis 18 January 2017 Russia faces real challenges in sustaining its military modernisation efforts, given low oil prices, Western sanctions and the cost of operations in Ukraine and Syria. Despite that, Moscow looks set to continue the program. At its heart is nuclear weapons modernisation. Russia’s most recent military doctrine, released in 2014, continues to emphasise the primacy of nuclear weapons in Russian defence policy, stating: ‘Russia reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in response to a use of nuclear or other weapons of mass destruction against her and (or) her allies, and in the case of an aggression against her with conventional weapons that would put in danger the very existence of the state.’ Issue No.1248, 20 January 2017 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies (CUWS) Outreach Journal

Three developments suggest a willingness by Russia to use nuclear weapons in response to non- nuclear attacks in a manner that lowers the threshold of nuclear war. First, the concept of preventative de-escalation is important. A recent IISS analysis explained de-escalation in which limited nuclear war could be used to: ‘…de-escalate and terminate combat actions on terms acceptable to Russia through the threat of inflicting unacceptable damage upon the enemy. Such limited nuclear use may deter both nuclear and conventional aggression.’ Second, the integration of conventional pre-nuclear and nuclear forces reinforces Russia’s coercive power against NATO in the pre-war ‘Phase Zero’ in a future regional crisis—for example, in the Baltics. And third, the Russians are clearly conscious of that coercive power given their recent nuclear signalling that suggests Russia continues to see such weapons as a means of national strength. Russia has undertaken sabre rattling through simulated nuclear strikes in large- scale exercises and aggressive probing of NATO airspace with nuclear-capable bombers. It has demonstrated the dual-role Kalibr NK sea-launched cruise missile in deadly strikes against Syria, and deployed dual-role Iskander short-range ballistic missiles into Kaliningrad in a manner that was highly threatening to NATO. That has been backed by public statements which reinforce Russia’s nuclear weapons capability and even explicit nuclear threats to NATO states, notably Denmark. Russian nuclear forces are being swiftly upgraded with the focus on ICBM modernisation, based on introducing the SS-27 ‘Yars’ road-mobile missile, and from 2018 the silo-based RS-28 ‘Sarmat’ heavy ICBM. Yars and Sarmat replace much of Russia’s aging Soviet strategic rocket forces with significantly more capable delivery systems. Russia’s Navy is transitioning to modern Sineva and Bulava sea-launched ballistic missiles, on the modern Borei class SSBNs, while the Russian Air Force is restarting the Tu-160 Blackjack production line to produce the updated Tu-160M2 bomber that eventually will be complemented by the ‘PAK-DA’ advanced bomber sometime in the 2020s. The strategic nuclear force modernisation is important but it’s the integration of Russia’s conventional pre-nuclear forces with its large ‘non-strategic nuclear forces’ that’s of greatest significance. That’s shaping Russian thinking on the use of nuclear weapons, particularly during Hybrid Warfare, in a way that makes the risk of a crisis with Russia much more dangerous. Russia is increasingly focusing on the use of its nuclear forces to enhance its ability to undertake military adventurism at the conventional level in a manner that’s highly threatening to NATO. However the reliance on nuclear signalling, the changing operational posture of dual-role forces and concepts like ’preventative de-escalation’, increases the risk of miscalculation in a crisis that could lead to an escalation through the nuclear threshold. Russia’s thinking on nuclear weapons contrasts with deliberate and explicit moves to diminish the role of nuclear forces by the US and its NATO alliance partners in recent years. For example, the Obama administration’s 2010 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR-2010) adjusted negative nuclear security assurances to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in responding to non-nuclear attack, and alluded to an eventual goal of ‘…making deterrence of nuclear attack on the United States or our allies and partners the sole purpose of US nuclear weapons.’ There’s also continuing debate over whether modernisation of ageing NATO non-strategic nuclear forces via the B-61-12 tactical bomb is justified given NATO has moved away from heavy reliance on tactical nuclear forces since the end of the Cold War. Certainly NATO states may see nuclear weapons as a tool for deterrence and (as noted in NPR 2010) only to be used in ‘extreme circumstances to defend the vital interests of the US and its allies Issue No.1248, 20 January 2017 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies CUWS Outreach Journal Maxwell AFB, Alabama or partners’. From Moscow’s perspective though, the integration of modernised conventional pre- nuclear and non-strategic nuclear forces is a means towards greater operational flexibility at the conventional level—as in a crisis over the Baltic States. Russia may feel that through implicit and explicit nuclear threats, and a lowering of the nuclear threshold in terms of operational use, it can have greater flexibility at the conventional level, with both general forces and ‘pre-strategic’ non- nuclear forces. NATO must decisively respond to that challenge and shift towards a stronger conventional and nuclear deterrent capability in Europe. Malcolm Davis is a senior analyst at ASPI. https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/russia-military-modernisation-lowering-nuclear-threshold/ Return to Top

War on the Rocks.com – U.S. OPINION/Commentary Mattis Talks Nukes, But Is Trump Listening? By Al Mauroni January 18, 2017 Over the next year, many observers will be closely watching how the incoming administration addresses America’s nuclear arsenal. The Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) report, a legislatively mandated review of the U.S. nuclear posture, provides Congress with the administration’s plans to develop nuclear policy, strategy, and capabilities. It is unclear as to whether or when we will see an NPR from the Trump administration. We do know that the next administration’s views on nuclear weapons will differ from those of the Obama administration. However, the recently released advance policy questions for James Mattis, President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for defense secretary, as well as his testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, could shed some light on how the Trump administration will approach U.S. nuclear policy. In the discussing U.S. nuclear posture, Mattis starts off nicely with the statement of strategic priorities. “My view of the Department of Defense’s strategic priorities is that we must first maintain a safe and secure nuclear deterrent. Second, we must field a decisive conventional force.” Mattis states, “We must maintain a robust nuclear deterrent and lethal conventional forces.” This statement is important for two reasons. First, Mattis clearly states that the nuclear force will be a top priority for U.S. national security. There’s a vocal arms control community that would like to rid the world of nuclear weapons, so establishing this early in his statement is important. As Colin Gray states in his book Weapons Don’t Make War, U.S. national security policy must have a nuclear dimension. The United States cannot bluff its way out of a nuclear confrontation with only conventional capabilities. Second, this point goes to the issue of affordability. It is an often-stated position that the nuclear modernization program may cost a trillion dollars over the next 30 years. That number is frequently used without the context of what the Department of Defense may spend on conventional weapons during that same period. Using a similar projection, one might roughly estimate U.S. defense spending to run to somewhere near $20 trillion, where nuclear weapons take up five percent of the total defense budget. It is not defendable, in light of current or future defense programming efforts, to say that nuclear weapons programs somehow imperil conventional weapons procurement. But if nuclear weapons are not prioritized above conventional weapons in the budget, we will certainly be forced to live with inadequate and aging nuclear weapons systems. Issue No.1248, 20 January 2017 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies (CUWS) Outreach Journal

Assuring NATO Members Mattis’ answers to the Senate questionnaire get very interesting when the topic changes to NATO. When asked whether U.S. nuclear weapons should be deployed in NATO countries, he answers “Yes. … I support the convention that NATO must maintain an appropriate mix of nuclear, conventional, and missile defense capabilities.” When questioned about the continued deployment of the B61 nuclear gravity bomb for NATO, he responds, “NATO’s nuclear deterrence posture relies in part on U.S. nuclear weapons forward-deployed in Europe” and the “current burden-sharing arrangements of which the B61 weapon system is an essential component.” How the United States can assure our NATO allies is a hard thing to calculate and measure. Recent increases in U.S. conventional force levels in Europe are not enough to meet this objective. Even as U.S. strategic bombers fly from Missouri to Europe in exercises, European political leaders want their air forces to work with the U.S. Air Force to maintain an in-theater nuclear capability. Another essential component of that capability is maintaining a dual-capable aircraft (DCA, capable of carrying both conventional and nuclear bombs) in theater as a sign of reassurance to NATO that the U.S. military will respond proportionally to Russian nuclear weapons threats or use. Mattis does not commit to a DCA-version of the F-35 Lightening II but states, “[t]he U.S. must continue to maintain the capability to forward-deploy strategic bombers and dual-capable aircraft as part of its nuclear and extended nuclear deterrence posture.” Certainly, the F-35 could provide that DCA capability in the very near-term. Belgian, Dutch, and Turkish F16s and German and Italian Tornado fighter-bombers — also dual-capable — are already preparing to accept the newest version of the B61 bomb, in the event that their first F-35s are not yet nuclear-capable. There are two significant points to be made here. First of all, there are numerous debates on the efficacy of NATO’s nuclear deterrent forces as regards to actual use of nuclear weapons or whether they are just Cold War symbols of U.S. commitment to NATO’s security. Those debates will continue. NATO’s continued public statements that alliance members want to keep this capability should be stressed. The rationale is not hard to understand. If Russia uses nuclear weapons against Europe, some European leaders may feel that the U.S. government will not use its strategic forces in response. During the Cold War, this debate was “will the United States sacrifice New York City for Berlin?” Being able to respond with in-theater nuclear weapons offered a step between conventional warfare in Europe and strategic nuclear warfare. Today, while both Russia and Western Europe have significantly reduced conventional forces, the same concern about escalating to a strategic nuclear conflict remains. Second, there is an idea that, if the United States did not spend so much money on modernizing nuclear forces, there would be more funds for U.S. conventional forces. Anyone familiar with defense programming knows that there is no axiom that reductions in nuclear weapons funding will automatically result in increases for conventional forces. In fact, Congress funded the U.S. European Reassurance Initiative, which is overwhelmingly made up of conventional forces, to the tune of $3.4 billion in addition to approving increases to nuclear modernization programs. In addition, NATO and deployed U.S. conventional forces that are significantly superior to Russian conventional forces and able to at least stop a Russian incursion beyond the Baltic States. These forces would not, however, be an effective deterrent against limited nuclear strikes by Russian forces intended to “de-escalate” a European conflict. And, that is exactly why Putin is modernizing Russian nuclear weapons and making public statements about their possible use in Europe.

Issue No.1248, 20 January 2017 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies CUWS Outreach Journal Maxwell AFB, Alabama The National Interest – Washington, D.C. OPINION/Feature Why THAAD in South Korea is a Red Line for China Beijing is subtly trying to expand its sphere of influence. By Robert E Kelly January 18, 2017 In 2016, the South Korean government agreed to the 2017 installation of a U.S. missile defense system, Terminal High Altitude Area Defense. The objective arguments for South Korean missile defense are pretty irrefutable at this point. North Korea’s missile program is well known. Pyongyang conducted dozens of tests just last year, and even talks up intercontinental ballistic missiles and submarine-launched ballistic missiles. Its nuclear-weapons capabilities, after five tests in ten years, are well established also. And the regime’s harsh, extreme rhetoric about South Korea—turning Seoul into a “sea of fire”—is notorious. If any state in the world needs missile defense, it is South Korea. The Chinese know all this. The Chinese also know that THAAD is not particularly effective against Chinese strategic forces. The South Korean THAAD radar will be configured around North Korea, not China, and cannot simply be “turned left”; the technology and software package is more complicated than that. The United States already has remote sensing for Chinese strategic launches in any case, so THAAD’s X-band radar adds nothing new. THAAD is also intended for use against a few incoming missiles (in their “terminal” phase, per the name of the system), not hundreds of missiles in the lift-off or boost stage, as would be the case were the Chinese to launch against the United States. American and South Korean officials have explained this to the Chinese repeatedly, and the media discussion of this has been quite extensive. It is hard to imagine that the Chinese are still unclear about the technical issues around THAAD. Politically, South Korea has tried for years to work with China on the underlying issue—North Korea’s missilization—to no avail. South Korean president Park Geun-hye launched a three- year charm offensive to flatter the Chinese into a tougher line on North Korea. South Korea has consistently reached out to China to work on North Korea sanctions at the United Nations. Seoul has said THAAD is only a stop-gap measure until its own Korean Air and Missile Defense is completed. It is very obvious that South Korea wants some kind of deal with China on North Korea. The THAAD decision came only after years of prevarication, during which Seoul would likely have made major concessions for serious Chinese action on the North. Yet the Chinese will not budge on THAAD, nor will they seriously enforce the sanctions. They warned South Korea for years not to accept THAAD and, in the last year, have threatened various punishments. Stephen Haggard conveniently brings together the many, often quite petty, ways in which the Chinese have struck back. Beijing is essentially demanding that South Korea remain defenseless—“roofless”—in the face of a spiraling nuclear missile threat on its doorstep. That is an astonishing ultimatum: to effectively surrender South Korean national security over an existential threat to demands of a foreign power. That China would make such a demand regarding an issue where the developments all broadly support the South Korean position—the North Korean missile threat is blatantly obvious, as is the South Korea’s thin defense—shows all the more chutzpah on Beijing’s part. The Chinese “argument” against THAAD is so preposterous that it is hard to read its demands against Seoul as anything but bullying power politics. The question, then, is why. What is China’s objectively bizarre resistance to something so obvious telling us? For years, China vigorously promoted the idea that its rise was different from that of Issue No.1248, 20 January 2017 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies (CUWS) Outreach Journal previous great powers. Its “peaceful rise” would open the possibility of a “new type of major power relationship” to promote a “harmonious world.” All would benefit from China’s growth, as the “One Belt, One Road” initiative tied Asia together. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank would help developing states. Even Chinese cultural production got in on the act. But in its maritime periphery, specifically, the South and East China Seas, China is acting, however quietly and obliquely, like a fairly typical aggrieved rising power. Its actions on Senkaku, the Paracels, Scarborough Shoal, North Korea and now THAAD all suggest that it expects regional states to bend to its demands conveniently packaged as uncontestable and expanding “core interests.” This looks an awful lot like a sphere of influence by stealth. China has learned the cost of unnecessary belligerence. It is avoiding the forthright aggressiveness of Imperial Germany or the Soviet Union, which both provoked large counter-coalitions to their rise. Instead, it pursues a salami-slicing strategy of pushing here and there to see what happens. This escalating coercive diplomacy worked reasonably well with the Philippines, where President Rodrigo Duterte last year gave up and bandwagoned with China to appease it. And in South Korea, this year’s leftist presidential candidates are hinting that they will roll back the THAAD deployment. Seoul conservatives will read this as “kowtowing” to Beijing, but economic anxiety is rising, given South Korea’s asymmetric economic interdependence with China. The next questions, then, are these: Will China try this bullying, using asymmetric economics and oblique threats as a lever, again elsewhere (Vietnam would be my guess)? And will Japan and the United States, the only regional powers with a serious ability to push back, eventually hit some kind of threshold and respond? Robert Kelly is an associate professor of international relations in the Department of Political Science at Pusan National University. http://nationalinterest.org/feature/why-thaad-south-korea-red-line-china-19098?page=show Return to Top

The Nation – Lahore, Pakistan OPINION/Commentary The Nuclear Sea Leg By M. A. Niazi January 20, 2017 Pakistan’s successful test of the Babar III, a Sea-Launched Cruise Missile (SCLM), was a game changer in the nuclear equation in the region, and also represented Pakistan’s completion of the third leg of the Nuclear Triad (air, land and sea). By giving Pakistan second-strike capability, it has probably added to the security of the region. However, this second-strike capability moves the conflict up a notch, and gives Pakistan an enhanced capacity to launch countervalue strikes. Pakistan has responded to the Indian testing of the Sagrika SLBM, and in the process has achieved a second-strike capability too, thereby setting the region firmly in the Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) doctrine which bedeviled the entire world when it was in place between the USA and the USSR during the Cold War.

Issue No.1248, 20 January 2017 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies CUWS Outreach Journal Maxwell AFB, Alabama It is ironic that Pakistan and India should be setting up a new nuclear balance at a time when the USA is contemplating the renewal of its aging nuclear arsenal. The question now is not whether the two opponents can inflict damage upon one another, but whether they can hold the world hostage because of the prospect of nuclear winter. The USA and Russia are still capable of inflicting nuclear winter on the world, and at the height of the Cold War, this terrible event was a real prospect. It was postulated that if the two opponents unleashed enough of their atomic bombs on each other, so much dust would be thrown up that the earth would become obscured from the sun, so that little or no sunlight would reach it. As a result temperatures would plummet, and all life would die of cold. Eventually, the dust could clear, and light would reach the earth, but there would no longer be any life on the planet. This prospect ended with the Cold War, but was revived when India went nuclear and Pakistan followed suit. Nuclear winter calculations have not been done for an Indo-Pak conflict, and it remains unlikely, because the original model included the use of hydrogen bombs by both sides, while the USA and USSR were postulated to attack targets in three continents: North America, Europe and Asia. An Indo-Pak contest would not involve hydrogen bombs, for while Pakistan has not tested such a weapon, the Indian test (one of the 1998 Pokhran tests) failed. While it might be argued that it is possible to develop a weapon without a test, and that even a failed test would provide information that would lead to weaponisation, postulating nuclear winter as a consequence of conflict might well be going too far, especially as any conflict would be geographically limited. However, hydrogen bombs are probably going to be one of the next goals of both nuclear establishments, now that they have completed the triads. The sea leg is particularly significant, because it means the survival of the deterrent is guaranteed even if the other side launches a first strike which is counterforce: one directed at the other side’s nuclear arsenal, such as the missile sites of the land leg of the triad, and the airbases where the Air leg (planes carrying either bombs, ALCMs (air-launched cruise missiles) or ALBMs (air-launched ballistic missiles) is stored. It is possible for naval vessels carrying nuclear weapons to be at sea, presenting a much more mobile target than missile sites and airbases which are fixed. However, counterforce targeting has to be accurate, not because collateral damage is to be avoided, as because the target must be hit. There is little advantage in causing massive destruction to a probably uninhabited part of the enemy’s country, if the targeted missile is undamaged, and free for use. That is the reason why the USA and USSR both ‘hardened’ their missile sites, both to prevent those missiles being destroyed, and to enable their being fired even if there had been a nearby nuclear detonation.’ Counter value targets represent targets such as dams, railway marshalling yards, and ports and also population centers. Concentrations of population represent ultimate targets of value. The USA chose to attack targets of value in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, on the only occasion nuclear weapons have been used. Even if a country’s land and air legs of the triad have been destroyed, it can use its sea leg. The sea leg has two broad advantages. First, it can only be neutralized if the vessel carrying it is sunk. If the weapons are carried on board a submarine, the best weapon against them are other submarines. As submarines are expensive vessels, navies often prefer antisubmarine destroyers, which may also have helicopters specially designed for antisubmarine warfare, which can be used for other functions. More important, subs can be located anywhere in international waters, and are not easily detectable. If they carry SLBMs, they may comfortably launch from halfway around the world. With the missiles possessed by the Indian and Pakistan Navies, they can launch at both coastal targets and against the other’s interior, while remaining comfortably in international waters. Issue No.1248, 20 January 2017 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies (CUWS) Outreach Journal

There is thus a pressing need to carry the SLBMs and SLCMs on nuclear submarines rather than the diesel-electric submarines in service in both navies. Nuclear subs can remain at sea virtually indefinitely, and under it as well (having a separate air purification technology installed). Nuclear subs need only surface to meet the needs of the crew for resupply, and rest and recreation. India is already operating an Akula-class Russian nuclear submarine as the INS Chakra, but it plans up to four Arihant-class nuclear subs by 2023, of which the Arihant has already been commissioned this August, and another, the Ardhaman, Is being prepared for sea trials. Because the doctrine depended on MAD, the USA and the USSR agreed that they would not develop anti-missile missiles, though that is what the USA’s Strategic Defence Initiative was. It ultimately led to the end of the Cold War. While Pakistan may not be able to develop an anti-ballistic missile, it can opt to complete its triad by working on obtaining a nuclear submarine fleet. The presence of all the service chiefs as well as the Chairman Joint Chiefs at the Babar III test indicates the importance all attached to it. While inter-service rivalry might exist over which is to control the nuclear weapon, the triad means that each service has its own. Now that each service has entered the nuclear age, it might be well to face the future, where the two rivals might see themselves locked into an ever-increasing nuclear spiral. Pakistan is behind in not having nuclear submarines. The next step would be to acquire them. Then one side might proceed to beef up its air leg by acquiring bombers that can not only fire ALCMs, but remain in the air, cruising for long periods. The need for secure satellites will drive the need for their own satellites. India is the one that, so far, has initiated major changes in the nuclear balance. Pakistan has merely followed suit. India should realize that, if it continues to follow the old Cold War nuclear calculus, Pakistan will follow suit. In the process, both might well be bankrupted. India would do well to remember that Russia lost the Cold War without a shot being fired because it could not afford the expense of the arms race. Hydrogen bombs are probably going to be one of the next goals of both nuclear establishments, now that they have completed the triads. The writer is a veteran journalist and founding member as well as Executive Editor of The Nation. http://nation.com.pk/columns/20-Jan-2017/the-nuclear-sea-leg Return to Top

ABOUT THE USAF CUWS The USAF Counterproliferation Center was established in 1998 at the direction of the Chief of Staff of the Air Force. Located at Maxwell AFB, this Center capitalizes on the resident expertise of Air University, while extending its reach far beyond - and influences a wide audience of leaders and policy makers. A memorandum of agreement between the Air Staff Director for Nuclear and Counterproliferation (then AF/XON), now AF/A5XP) and Air War College Commandant established the initial manpower and responsibilities of the Center. This included integrating counterproliferation awareness into the curriculum and ongoing research at the Air University; establishing an information repository to promote research on counterproliferation and nonproliferation issues; and directing research on the various topics associated with counterproliferation and nonproliferation. The Secretary of Defense's Task Force on Nuclear Weapons Management released a report in 2008 that recommended "Air Force personnel connected to the nuclear mission be required to take a professional military education (PME) course on national, defense, and Air Force concepts for deterrence and defense." As a result, the Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center, in coordination with the AF/A10 and Air Force Global Strike Command, established a series of courses at Kirtland AFB to provide continuing education through the careers of those Air Force personnel working in or supporting the nuclear enterprise. This mission was transferred to the Counterproliferation Center in 2012, broadening its mandate to providing education and research to not just countering WMD but also nuclear deterrence. In February 2014, the Center’s name was changed to the Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies to reflect its broad coverage of unconventional weapons issues, both offensive and defensive, across the six joint operating concepts (deterrence operations, cooperative security, major combat operations, irregular warfare, stability operations, and homeland security). The term “unconventional weapons,” currently defined as nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons, also includes the improvised use of chemical, biological, and radiological hazards. The CUWS's military insignia displays the symbols of nuclear, biological, and chemical hazards. The arrows above the hazards represent the four aspects of counterproliferation - counterforce, active defense, passive defense, and consequence management.

Issue No.1248, 20 January 2017 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538