Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 Articles & Other Documents:

Featured Article: Lawmakers Ask Obama to Shield Nuke Programs from Funding Cuts

1. West Angry for IAEA''s Failure to Address Syria's Nuke 2. Israel: Decade after 9/11, Iran must Not Get Nukes 3. Russia Says it’s ready for More Nuclear Cooperation with Iran 4. U.N. Nuclear Chief Says more Concerned about Iran 5. Syria Offers Nuclear Cooperation, IAEA Says 6. Cheney: Israel would Strike Iran to Prevent It from Achieving Nuclear Weapons 7. UN Nuke Chief to Publish New Intel on Iran 8. Iran Celebrates Initial Launch of Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant 9. Iran Identifies 34 Sites for N-Plants 10. 'No Need' for Iranian Nuclear Arms: Ahmadinejad 11. U.S. Expert - North Korea May Need More Atomic Tests 12. No Positive Action yet from N. Korea to Reopen Six-Party Talks: Wi 13. Drones could Provide Updated Intelligence on North Korean Missile Sites 14. Pakistani Pleads Guilty in US Nuclear Export Case 15. Maiden Voyage for World’s most Heavy Armed Submarine 16. Lawmakers Ask Obama to Shield Nuke Programs from Funding Cuts 17. For the First Time in Decades the Navy Is Building Two Nuclear Submarines Simultaneously 18. U.S., Romania Set to Sign Missile Shield Agreement 19. Now, a Handheld Device to Sniff Out Nuclear Bomb in a Suitcase 20. World Stability Depends On American Might 21. Keeping Nuclear Terrorism a Threat Only in Theory 22. Turning Up the Heat 23. Explaining Libya to Iran 24. A Decade On, Pakistan Wavering

Welcome to the CPC Outreach Journal. As part of USAF Counterproliferation Center’s mission to counter weapons of mass destruction through education and research, we’re providing our government and civilian community a source for timely counterproliferation information. This information includes articles, papers and other documents addressing issues pertinent to US military response options for dealing with chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) threats and countermeasures. It’s our hope this information resource will help enhance your counterproliferation issue awareness. Established in 1998, the USAF/CPC provides education and research to present and future leaders of the Air Force, as well as to members of other branches of the armed services and Department of Defense. Our purpose is to help those agencies better prepare to counter the threat from weapons of mass destruction. Please feel free to visit our web site at http://cpc.au.af.mil/ for in-depth information and specific points of contact. The following articles, papers or documents do not necessarily reflect official endorsement of the United States Air Force, Department of Defense, or other US government agencies. Reproduction for private use or commercial gain is subject to original copyright restrictions. All rights are reserved.

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 The following articles, papers or documents do not necessarily reflect official endorsement of the United States Air Force, Department of Defense, or other US government agencies. Reproduction for private use or commercial gain is subject to original copyright restrictions. All rights are reserved.

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

Kuwait News Agency (KUNA) West Angry for IAEA''s Failure to Address Syria's Nuke September 11, 2011 VIENNA, Sept 11 (KUNA) -- Diplomats inside the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) revealed Sunday that several Western countries have expressed dissatisfaction with the international agency's new report for its failure to highlight the alleged Syrian nuke activities. This state of discontent was conveyed by the representatives of those countries in IAEA to the international agency's Director-General Yukiya Amano. The diplomats told KUNA, on condition of anonymity, that those Western countries have criticized Amano because he has focused in the report released on Friday on nuclear activities of Iran and North Korea and did not give due attention to the alleged Syrian nuke activities. The report will be discussed Monday by the Board of Governors, the IAEA highest political and technical body. The diplomats disclosed that ambassadors of Canada, Australia and other European Union states met with Director General of the IAEA this week and informed him that the pending issues related to the Syrian nuclear file should be referred to the Board of Governors after the annual conference of the year. They expected that these countries would touch upon the Syrian nuclear activities in their speeches before the IAEA Board of Governors despite the Secretary General report did not tackle it. The IAEA referred the Syrian nuclear file to the United Nations Security Council after the adoption of a US draft resolution last June. http://www.kuna.net.kw/NewsAgenciesPublicSite/ArticleDetails.aspx?id=2189566&Language=en (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Miami Herald Sunday, September 11, 2011 Israel: Decade after 9/11, Iran must Not Get Nukes The Associate Press JERUSALEM -- Israel's prime minister says a decade after the Sept. 11 attacks, Iran's nuclear program must be stopped and that the possibility of extremists getting atomic weapons is a real threat. Benjamin Netanyahu spoke at a memorial Sunday marking the anniversary of the attacks in the U.S. In the speech, he repeated a long-standing plea to the world to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Israel considers Iran a serious threat because of its nuclear program, support for anti-Israel militants and frequent references to Israel's destruction. Netanyahu said the "the possibility that the world's most dangerous weapons will fall into the hands of the world's most dangerous regimes is too real." http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/09/11/2401484/israel-decade-after-911-iran-must.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

The Daily Star – Lebanon Russia Says it’s ready for More Nuclear Cooperation with Iran September 12, 2011 Agencies

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

TEHRAN: Russian Energy Minister Sergei Shmatko Sunday promised further nuclear cooperation with Iran, after building the Islamic Republic’s first atomic power plant despite objections from the United States.“ I say with certainty that in the future, we will have more cooperation in the Bushehr power plant, and also in the development of other projects in the field of nuclear energy,” Shmatko said at a news conference with Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi. “I think this *cooperation+ is in the interest of the Iranian people,” Shmatko added, without giving a timetable for future projects or saying whether they would include new power plants. The Bushehr plant was linked to the national grid early this month, and Monday Tehran has organized a ceremony to acknowledge the plant achieving 40 percent of its 1,000 megawatts capacity. The plant was formally inaugurated in August 2010, but the reactor began operation in May. The Islamic Republic’s atomic chief, Fereydoun Abbasi Davani, said in August that Tehran and Moscow had held negotiations for further nuclear cooperation, and that Russia had made “proposals” to build new nuclear power plants in Iran. Davani did not provide further details, and Moscow had not confirmed the information. On Sunday, Shmatko said “nuclear energy was having a difficult time in the world, particularly after the incident” in Fukushima, Japan. “We should realize that this cooperation should reflect new safety measures as required in nuclear projects around the world,” he added. Both Iranian and Russian officials have repeatedly cited security considerations as justification for repeated delays in the commissioning of the Bushehr plant. The delays have even provoked criticism from the Iranian side, with some officials openly accusing Moscow of stalling in the face of pressure from the United States, which tried in vain to halt the project. Construction of the plant started in the 1970s with the assistance of German company Siemens. However, Siemens quit the project after the 1979 Islamic Revolution over concerns about nuclear proliferation. In 1994, Russia agreed to complete the building of the plant and provide fuel for it, with the supply deal committing Iran to returning the spent fuel, amid Western concerns over the Islamic republic’s controversial uranium enrichment program. Separately, Iran’s nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili has written to the European Union foreign affairs chief to announce the Islamic state’s readiness for fresh nuclear talks with major powers, the foreign minister said Sunday. “A few days ago, Mr. Jalili’s letter was sent to Ms. Catherine Ashton … saying Iran is prepared for talks … to reach bilateral agreements,” Ali Akbar Salehi said in a news conference, when asked about Iran’s nuclear work. Iran’s nuclear talks with major powers in January failed after the Islamic state refused to halt its uranium enrichment, as demanded by the United Nations Security Council. Iran has been hit by international sanctions for refusing to halt its sensitive nuclear activities, which it says is only aimed at generating electricity. http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2011/Sep-12/148504-russia-says-its-ready-for-more-nuclear- cooperation-with-iran.ashx#axzz1Xk3b5Syu (Return to Articles and Documents List)

News Daily

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

U.N. Nuclear Chief Says more Concerned about Iran Monday, September 12, 2011 By Fredrik Dahl VIENNA (Reuters) - The head of the U.N.'s atomic watchdog said he was increasingly concerned on Monday about possible activity in Iran to develop a nuclear missile and accused Tehran of failing to cooperate fully with his inspectors. Yukiya Amano, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, told the IAEA's 35-nation board he hoped to "set out in greater detail the basis for the agency's concerns so that all member states are fully informed." Such a move by Amano would add to pressure on Iran, one of the world's largest oil producers which is facing tightening international sanctions pressure over a nuclear programme the West suspects has military aims. "Iran is not providing the necessary cooperation to enable the agency to provide credible assurance about the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities," Amano said. He spoke a day after Iran said it was ready for fresh nuclear talks with major powers, and had sent a letter to European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton. The Islamic Republic has in recent weeks signalled increased openness and willingness to cooperate with the IAEA about its disputed nuclear work, which it says is for purely peaceful purposes. But Western diplomats have dismissed this as an Iranian "charm offensive" without substance and an apparent attempt by Tehran to buy time, while it refuses to bow to demands to halt sensitive uranium enrichment. Since talks between global powers and Iran foundered in January, Russia has advocated a phased plan in which Tehran would address concerns that it may be seeking nuclear weapons, and be rewarded with an easing of sanctions. Iran has often said it is willing to resume talks. But its insistence that other countries recognise its right to enrich uranium is a major stumbling block, particularly for Western diplomats who see it as an unacceptable pre- condition. NUCLEAR PAYLOAD? Uranium enriched to a low level of fissile purity is suitable for running civilian nuclear power plants. If refined to a much higher degree, it can form the core of nuclear bombs. Amano said Iran had demonstrated "greater transparency" during a five-day visit by a senior IAEA official to the country last month, when it showed facilities the agency had not had access to for several years. But, "greater transparency and Iran's full proactive engagement are also needed concerning its other nuclear activities," Amano added. Since the IAEA board last met in June, Iran had installed uranium enrichment centrifuges in an underground bunker near the holy city of Qom and also informed the IAEA about planned new uranium conversion activity. These steps were in "further contravention of Security Council and Board of Governors resolutions," Amano said. Echoing the findings of a confidential IAEA report earlier this month, Amano told the closed-door meeting, according to a copy of his remarks: "The agency is increasingly concerned about the possible existence in Iran of past or current undisclosed nuclear related-activities involving military-related organisations, including activities related to the development of a nuclear payload for a missile." He said the Vienna-based U.N. agency continued to receive new information about these issues.

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

For several years, the IAEA has been investigating Western intelligence reports indicating Iran has coordinated efforts to process uranium, test high explosives and revamp a ballistic missile cone to accommodate a nuclear warhead. The IAEA, tasked with ensuring that nuclear technology is not diverted for military aims, says Iran has not seriously engaged with the agency on these issues since 2008. Iran says the allegations are forged and baseless. It denies harbouring any nuclear weapon ambitions, saying it wants to refine uranium to generate electricity and produce isotopes for medicine and agriculture. Reporting by Fredrik Dahl; Editing by Andrew Heavens http://www.newsdaily.com/stories/tre78b2mi-us-nuclear-iran-iaea-concerned/ (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Los Angeles Times Syria Offers Nuclear Cooperation, IAEA Says By Reuters September 12, 2011 VIENNA, Sept 12 (Reuters) - Syria has offered to cooperate with a U.N. nuclear watchdog probe into a suspected reactor site after years of stonewalling, and a meeting may take place in October, the Vienna-based agency's head said on Monday. U.S. intelligence reports have said the Dair Alzour complex was a nascent, North Korean-designed reactor intended to produce plutonium for atomic weaponry, before Israeli warplanes reduced it to rubble in 2007. Syria has said it was a non-nuclear military facility. In June, the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency board of governors voted to report Syria to the Security Council, rebuking it for failing to cooperate with the agency probe. Addressing the board on Monday, IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano said Syria in a letter last month had "stated its readiness to have a meeting with agency safeguards staff in Damascus in October." The purpose of the talks would be to "agree on an action plan to resolve the outstanding issues" regarding the Dair Alzour site, Amano cited the Syrian letter as saying. He said the IAEA had proposed that the meeting take place on Oct 10-11 "with the aim of advancing the agency's verification mission in Syria." Reporting by Fredrik Dahl http://www.latimes.com/sns-rt-nuclear-syriaiaeal5e7kc1gv-20110912,0,1768354.story (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Ha’aretz Daily – Israel 12 September 2011 Cheney: Israel would Strike Iran to Prevent It from Achieving Nuclear Weapons Former U.S. Vice President says his assessment comes from a number of conversations with Israeli officials, adds his belief that Israel 'will do whatever it needs to guarantee its survival'.

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

By Shlomo Shamir Former U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney believes Israel would attack Iran to prevent it from achieving nuclear weapons capacity, he said in an interview aired Monday. When asked about the possibility of an Israeli preemptive attack against Iran, Cheney told Newsmax TV that "Iran represents an existential threat, and [the Israelis] will do whatever they have to do to guarantee their survival and their security.” Cheney said his assessment did not come from consultation with a particular Israeli leader, but was rather a reflection of a number of discussions with Israeli officials. “I can’t attribute it to any one particular Israeli leader. I wouldn’t want to do that," he said. Nevertheless, he added that he "had a number of conversations with a lot of Israeli officials, and I think they correctly perceive Iran as a basic threat.” Last month, the New York Times reported that Cheney urged the U.S. to bomb a suspected Syrian nuclear reactor in June 2007, quoting excerpts from his book. According to Cheney, former U.S. President George W. Bush refused his demands and opted for a diplomatic approach after other advisers expressed apprehension. Foreign reports indicate that the Syria reactor was later bombed by Israel in September 2007. “I again made the case for U.S. military action against the reactor,” the New York Times quoted Cheney as writing about a meeting on the issue. “But I was a lone voice. After I finished, the president asked, ‘Does anyone here agree with the vice president?’ Not a single hand went up around the room.” In Cheney's autobiography, "In My Time: A Personal and Political Memoir,” which is to be published by Simon & Schuster on Tuesday, he relates his experiences as Vice President to Bush, discussing his opinions on the United States' nuclear weapons agreement with North Korea, his handling of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks – when Bush was away from Washington and hampered by communications breakdowns – and his stance on Bush's approach to dealing with Iraq. In Bush's own memoir, published in 2010, he claims that in 2007, then-prime minister Ehud Olmert asked him to bomb a nuclear facility in Syria. Bush was given an intelligence report on the suspicious, well-concealed facility, and Olmert then asked him in a phone conservation to bomb the site, concerned that the Syrians were developing nuclear weapons with North Korean assistance. http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/cheney-israel-would-strike-iran-to-prevent-it-from-achieving- nuclear-weapons-1.383972 (Return to Articles and Documents List)

El Paso Times UN Nuke Chief to Publish New Intel on Iran By GEORGE JAHN, Associated Press September 12, 2011 VIENNA—The head of the U.N. nuclear agency on Monday announced plans to publish new information backing up his belief that Iran may be working on a nuclear warhead—developments that leave his organization "increasingly concerned." The comments by International Atomic Energy Agency chief Yukiya Amano were significant because it was the first time he revealed plans to release some of the most recent knowledge available to the IAEA leading to such worries.

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

A diplomat familiar with IAEA affairs said Amano would seek permission from the agency members providing intelligence on the alleged warhead experiments before sharing them with the agency's 35 board member nations. Such new information would likely be detailed in the next report on Iran's nuclear activities in November or could be shared with board members at a special closed session. The diplomat asked for anonymity in exchange for divulging confidential information. Israel, the United States and Washington's western allies have traditionally been the source of most of such intelligence. But Amano last month spoke of "many member states" providing evidence for his assessment and described the information as credible, "extensive and comprehensive." The U.S. and its allies accuse Iran of using its civilian nuclear program as a cover to develop nuclear weapons. Iran denies the claim and says it only seeks reactors for energy and scientific research. Speaking at the start of a five-day meeting of the IAEA's 35-nation board, Amano also reiterated that, despite Syrian denials, a target hit in 2007 by Israeli warplanes was a nearly completed nuclear reactor meant to produce plutonium, which can be used to arm nuclear warheads. At the same time, he announced that his staff would meet with Syrian officials next month to work out an "action plan" allowing Damascus to make good on promises to present new information on the site in its attempts to prove that the structure was a non-nuclear military facility. He also had some positive words for Iran, saying it had demonstrated "greater transparency" than usual, in allowing a senior IAEA official to tour previously restricted nuclear sites last month. At the same time, Amano urged the Islamic Republic to show more openness on other nuclear issues of concern. The agency, he said, "continues to receive new information" about Iranian attempts to develop a nuclear warhead, adding that he hoped "to set out in greater details the basis for the agency's concerns" in the near future. Amano had already said he was "increasingly concerned" about possible warhead experiments by Iran in a report made available to The Associated Press earlier this month, when it was also shared with board members and the U.N. Security Council. The phrase "increasingly concerned"—was also used by Amano in his remarks to the board Monday. It has not appeared in previous reports discussing Iran's alleged nuclear weapons work and reflects the frustration felt by him over the lack of progress in his investigations. In its report, the International Atomic Energy Agency said "many member states" are providing evidence for that assessment, describing the information it is receiving as credible, "extensive and comprehensive." The report also said Tehran had started installing equipment to enrich uranium at a new location—an underground bunker that is better protected from air attack than its present enrichment facilities. Enrichment can produce both nuclear fuel and fissile warhead material, and Tehran—which says it wants only to produce fuel with the technology—is under four sets of U.N. Security Council sanctions for refusing to freeze enrichment. It also denies secretly experimenting with a nuclear weapons program and has blocked a four-year attempt by the IAEA to follow up on intelligence that it secretly designed blueprints linked to a nuclear payload on a missile, experimented with exploding a nuclear charge, and conducted work on other components of a weapons program. In a 2007 estimate, the U.S. intelligence community said that while Iran had worked on a weapons program such activities appeared to have ceased in 2003. But diplomats say a later intelligence summary avoided such specifics, and recent IAEA reports on the topic have expressed growing unease that such activities may be continuing. http://www.elpasotimes.com/nationworld/ci_18876277 (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Tehran Times – Iran Political Desk Iran Celebrates Initial Launch of Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant Tuesday, September 13, 2011 BUSHEHR – In a special ceremony on Monday, the Bushehr nuclear power plant was temporarily connected to the national grid, the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) announced. Russian Energy Minister Sergei Shmatko, Russian State Atomic Energy Corporation (Rosatom) Director General Sergei Kirienko, AEOI Director Fereydoun Abbasi, Iranian Energy Minister Majid Namjou, and a number of MPs attended the ceremony held to celebrate the initial launch of the Bushehr nuclear plant. Reportedly, the power plant has reached 40 percent it power generation capacity. According to an official at the Bushehr power plant, after the initial launch, the power plant will be disconnected from the national grid and will undergo some technical tests. The AEOI has announced that the power plant will reach its full capacity in November. The plant, which is located near the port city of Bushehr on the coast of the Persian Gulf, will generate 1000 megawatts of electricity once it becomes fully operational. The power plant first was launched in August 2010 as engineers loaded 163 fuel rods into the reactor under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency, and the AEOI announced that the power plant will be connected to the national grid by February 20. But in February, Iran unloaded fuel from the reactor due to safety concerns. Later, Iranian engineers in cooperation with Russian experts completed the reloading of the reactor. Iranian and Russian experts have given permission for the initial launch of the power plant after carrying out rigorous safety tests and inspections. Iran offers consultancy service to other countries During the ceremony, the AEOI director said that the Islamic Republic is ready to provide consultancy service to other countries, which intend to use nuclear energy for peaceful applications. Abbasi also said that the completion of the Bushehr power plant is a promising event, which will help expansion of relations between Iran and Russia. Elsewhere in his remarks, he reassured that highest safety standards have been applied in the construction of the power plant. Launch of Bushehr power plant, a great honor for Russia The Russian energy minister also said that the launch of the Bushehr power plant is great honor for Russia. “Iran has joined the club of advanced countries, which possess (the technology to develop) nuclear energy. Russia is greatly proud of playing an important role to help Iran join the club,” Shmatko said. He also described the Bushehr power plant as the symbol of Iran-Russia cooperation and said that Tehran-Moscow nuclear cooperation will not be limited to the Bushehr plant. On the sidelines of the ceremony, the Nuclear Power Production and Development Co. of Iran and Russian State Atomic Energy Corporation signed two protocols on the continuation of nuclear cooperation. http://www.tehrantimes.com/index.php/component/content/article/2490

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

(Return to Articles and Documents List)

Press TV – Iran Iran Identifies 34 Sites for N-Plants Tuesday, September 13, 2011 Deputy Head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization Mohammad Ahmadian says Iran has identified 34 potential sites for building new nuclear power plants. Ahmadian said that in order to identify appropriate locations, the country has been divided to six zones, adding that studies on the sites will be completed by the end of December, IRNA reported. He said that the south coast of the country was the major priority for the sites as there was easy access to water to cool down reactors. He said that Iran could generate 20,000 megawatts of electricity by building more nuclear power plants. The official added that Iranian scientists possessed expertise to build new nuclear plants but reiterated that Iran was willing to cooperate with foreign scientists to receive updated new technology. He said that the International Atomic Energy Agency has verified the safety of the Bushehr plant, Iran's first nuclear plant, and assured Iran's neighbors that the plant would pose no threat to the region. Iran officially launched the Bushehr plant on Monday. The plant was connected to the national power grid earlier this month. It will initially generate electricity at 40 percent of its capacity and will reach its full capacity of one-thousand megawatts in about two or three months. http://www.presstv.ir/detail/198856.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Times of India – India 'No Need' for Iranian Nuclear Arms: Ahmadinejad Agence France-Presse (AFP) September 13, 2011 WASHINGTON: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad insisted on Tuesday that his country has "no need" for nuclear weapons, amid new concerns from an international atomic watchdog group about Tehran's atomic ambitions. "We do not need nuclear weapons and we do not accept that," Ahmadinejad told the NBC television "Today Show" program. "We are against that," he said. He made his remarks as the board of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) meets in Vienna this week to discuss, among other matters, Iran's nuclear activities, which many in the West suspect are aimed at developing atomic weapons. The IAEA, which is meeting at its Vienna headquarters from Monday to Friday, was also to discuss the atomic nuclear aspirations of Syria and North Korea. The IAEA said in a confidential report obtained earlier this month by AFP that it is "increasingly concerned about the possible existence in Iran of past or current undisclosed nuclear related activities involving military related organizations," the report said.

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

These included "activities related to the development of a nuclear payload for a missile". The Islamic republic insists, however, that its activities are aimed exclusively at developing nuclear power. "This is an old and repeated story," Ahmadinejad told NBC television. "In principle, we are against nuclear weapons because it is against our beliefs and our ideology," he said. The UN Security Council has slapped four rounds of sanctions on Iran to get it to suspend uranium enrichment, a process which can produce fuel for a reactor but which also can be used in a nuclear warhead. The 35-member IAEA board was also to discuss nuclear safety in Japan following the Fukushima disaster last March. The IAEA issued a 12-point program encouraging fresh assessments and emergency plans for the world's 440 nuclear plants. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/No-need-for-Iranian-nuclear-arms- Ahmadinejad/articleshow/9970221.cms (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Los Angeles Times U.S. Expert - North Korea May Need More Atomic Tests By Fredrik Dahl, Reuters September 9, 2011 * North Korea can make "rudimentary" nuclear bomb-Hecker * Says more atomic tests needed for warhead development * Concerned about possible Pyongyang-Tehran atom links VIENNA (Reuters) - North Korea has "good technical reasons" to carry out at least one more atomic test if it wants to develop a nuclear-armed missile, a prominent U.S. scientist who has often visited the reclusive Asian state said on Friday. The North tested nuclear devices in 2006 and 2009, but still has not shown it has a working nuclear bomb. Proliferation experts have said the country has enough fissile material for up to 10 nuclear weapons, but they don't believe it can miniaturise one to place on a missile. Stanford University's Siegfried Hecker, who late last year was shown a previously undetected uranium enrichment facility in North Korea, said he believed the isolated state knew how to build a "relatively simple, rudimentary plutonium bomb". But, "I don't believe they could have confidence on the basis of those tests to make one small enough to mount on a missile," Hecker told a seminar for diplomats in Vienna. "So if they want ... to have the confidence that they had one they can mount on a missile, if they want to convince the rest of the world, they would need at least one other nuclear test." In October last year, a South Korean government source was quoted as saying that a U.S. satellite had detected increased activity at a North Korean nuclear weapons test site, suggesting it could be preparing for a third test. But tensions have eased on the peninsula this year and a flurry of diplomacy has raised hopes for a resumption of regional talks on disabling the North's nuclear programme. Hecker suggested a limited availability of fissile material in the North as well as the reaction of the outside world, including that of its biggest patron China, could make the North think twice about conducting any more tests.

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

"But in my opinion there is still a very good possibility that, under what they would consider the right political circumstances, they may do another nuclear test," he said. "Certainly, technically I would think that that is what they would want to do." IRAN-NORTH KOREA NUCLEAR AXIS? North Korea often uses Hecker, a former director of the U.S. Los Alamos National Laboratory where the atomic bomb was developed, as its preferred foreign scientist to demonstrate its nuclear capabilities. He has visited seven times since 2004. In November 2010, it showed him an enrichment facility at its Yongbyon nuclear complex, stoking regional tension as the advance could give it a second route to making nuclear arms. The isolated state says it is only pursuing uranium enrichment for peaceful energy purposes. As for its plutonium programme, Pyongyang says it was cornered into pursuing nuclear weapons because of the United States' nuclear threat. "My conclusion of the North Korean nuclear programme is, yes, they have a bomb, but not much of a nuclear arsenal," Hecker said, adding there was a low threat the North would actually use one. He suggested the proliferation risk Pyongyang posed was a more immediate concern. Much of the North's income in the past has been generated through arms sales. Last year, a U.N. report suggested the North may have supplied Syria, Iran and Myanmar with banned atomic technology. "The world knows that North Korea did a lot of exporting of missile technology. Now it appears that North Korea has also gone into the nuclear export business," Hecker said. "That to me is the most immediate threat, needs to be stopped now." Hecker said he did not know whether North Korea and Iran, which the West suspects of seeking to develop nuclear weapons capability, were involved in any nuclear dealings. But, "the Iran-North Korea axis is my greatest concern for the exchange of nuclear technologies because they complement each other so well," Hecker said. "There is just a lot of synergy in how they would be able to exchange capabilities." Reporting by Fredrik Dahl; Editing by Janet Lawrence http://www.latimes.com/sns-rt-nuclear-koreaheckerl5e7k92g4-20110909,0,3906896,full.story (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Yonhap News – South Korea September 10, 2011 No Positive Action yet from N. Korea to Reopen Six-Party Talks: Wi SEOUL, Sept. 10 (Yonhap) -- North Korea has yet to take meaningful steps to re-start long-stalled six-party talks on its nuclear programs, South Korea's chief nuclear envoy said Saturday after a visit to the United States. Wi Sung-lac met with Assistant Secretary of State Kurt Campbell and other senior U.S. officials to discuss the North's nuclear programs during his trip to Washington. "There is no North Korean response yet, and South Korea and the United States are waiting," Wi told Yonhap News Agency by phone after arrival at Incheon International Airport.

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

North Korea calls for an early resumption of the talks without any pre-conditions but Seoul and Washington maintain that the communist country should first prove in action before re-opening the forum that it will not renege again on its earlier promise to denuclearize. Any such North Korean action could include the re-entry of U.N. nuclear monitors the country expelled at the height of the current nuclear crisis in 2002, Seoul officials said. Wi said he has confirmed during the trip that the United States supports another round of inter-Korean nuclear talks. The nuclear envoys of the two Koreas met on the sidelines of a regional security conference in Indonesia in July for the first time in more than two years. The inter-Korean nuclear talks paved the way for a rare high-level meeting between North Korea and the U.S. in New York later that month on nuclear and other issues pending between the two countries. "I confirmed strong U.S. support for the second round of inter-Korean denuclearization talks," Wi said, adding that North Korea has shown no indication that it would go for another meeting with South Korea. The envoy also said Washington was cautious about holding follow-up talks with North Korea. The six-party talks, which involve the two Koreas, the U.S., China, Japan and Russia, were suspended in 2009 when North Korea walked out of it. The stalled six-party talks were a major issue when North Korean leader Kim Jong-il met with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in a Siberian city last month. http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2011/09/10/8/0301000000AEN20110910001600315F.HTML (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Stars and Stripes Drones could Provide Updated Intelligence on North Korean Missile Sites By Seth Robson, Stars and Stripes September 12, 2011 TOKYO — The U.S. is negotiating with South Korea to fly the RQ-4 Global Hawk surveillance drone near the Demilitarized Zone, a move that could provide an unprecedented view of goings-on in reclusive North Korea and draw the ire of China. Flown extensively in Afghanistan and Iraq for the past 10 years, the first Global Hawk arrived on Guam late last year and there are now three flying in the Asia Pacific theater. South Korea is among a large group of nations in the region with whom U.S. officials are negotiating for flyover rights, according to Lt. Col. Terran Reneau, chief of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance for the 13th Air Force in Hawaii. Reneau did not give a timetable for the negotiations with the South Koreans but added: “I think we are very close” to flying in Korea. South Korean officials would not comment on the Global Hawk issue. Lt. Col. David Gerhardt, Pacific Air Forces’ chief of command and control, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance requirements, added: “Global Hawk will likely fly over land in Korea as soon as agreements have been solidified to do that.” Gerhardt did not name other nations in negotiations over Global Hawk flyover rights but said those closest to Guam with potential emergency landing sites are among the first to be approached by the U.S.

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

South Korean media have also reported that Seoul is interested in buying its own Global Hawks, which carry long- range and infrared cameras, RADAR and listening devices that can intercept foreign military signals. According to the aircraft’s manufacturer, Northrop Grumman, the Global Hawk flies at 60,000 feet and has a line of sight to targets more than 340 miles away. The range of the aircraft’s cameras and sensors is classified but the line of sight from a Global Hawk flying near the DMZ would extend well beyond the Yalu River that marks North Korea’s border with China. The drone, conceived in 1995 as a replacement for the U-2 spy plane, will enable U.S. intelligence agencies to update databases on military movement and missile sites in North Korea, said retired Air Force Col. Ralph Cossa, who is the president of the Pacific Forum Center for Strategic and International Studies in Hawaii. Of particular interest to U.S. intelligence officers is North Korea’s development of nuclear weapons. In 2006 the regime, which has a long track record of using terrorism and unprovoked military attacks on its neighbors, announced that it had tested a nuclear bomb. Once approved to use the South’s airways, the Global Hawk’s cameras could focus on places where experts believe the North might be developing weapons of mass destruction. “One never knows what Pyongyang is up to, and watching sudden moves could provide an indication of an impending provocative action,” Cossa said. North Korea’s record of violent provocation is long and varied. Last year a North Korean torpedo sank the South Korean navy ship Cheonan, killing 46 sailors. In November, North Korean artillery shelled South Korea’s Yeonpyeong island, killing four. The North Koreans and their Chinese neighbors won’t be happy about the presence of the Global Hawk so close to their borders, Cossa said. “The Chinese in particular are raising concerns about U.S. reconnaissance off their coast,” Cossa said. “At least Global Hawk is more out of sight and [has] greater stand-off range, which might make it appear less provocative ... but *it+ will still hurt the feelings of 1.3 billion Chinese people who resent being spied upon.” In July, China’s Defense Ministry demanded an end to the U.S. military surveillance flights near China, according to a report in the Global Times newspaper, which is part of the Communist Party-controlled news media. “We demand that the U.S. respect China’s sovereignty and security interests, and take concrete measures to boost a healthy and stable development of military relations,” the ministry said. The Chinese demand followed revelations that two Chinese Su-27 jets chased a U-2 aircraft over the Taiwan Strait on June 29, and that one jet crossed over the dividing line between Taiwan and the mainland along the 100-mile- wide waterway. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen told the Washington Times that he discussed the reconnaissance flights during a visit to China and at earlier talks in Washington with Chinese Gen. Chen Bingde, chief of the general staff. “This is international airspace in this case, and we won’t be deterred from flying in international airspace,” Mullen was quoted as saying in the newspaper. Mullen said halting the reconnaissance flights and giving in to Chinese demands would violate long-established international rules for freedom of navigation. “The Chinese would see us move out of there,” he said. “I don’t see that as the case. We’re not going to do that, from my perspective. These reconnaissance flights are important.”

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Not surprisingly, the Chinese appear to be working on their own version of the Global Hawk. Photographs of a Chinese drone — dubbed the Xianglong, which bears a striking resemblance to Northop Grumman’s aircraft — were posted in June on websites that monitor the Chinese military. http://www.stripes.com/news/drones-could-provide-updated-intelligence-on-north-korean-missile-sites-1.154892 (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Arab News – Saudi Arabia Pakistani Pleads Guilty in US Nuclear Export Case By REUTERS September 9, 2011 WASHINGTON: A Pakistani national pleaded guilty on Friday in a US court to conspiring to commit export violations in a scheme to illegally transfer nuclear-related materials to his home country from the United States. The US Justice Department said Nadeem Akhtar, 46, who lives in Silver Spring, Maryland, a Washington suburb, entered the guilty plea at a court hearing in Baltimore, Maryland, as part of a deal with federal prosecutors. Under his plea agreement, Akhtar, who owned a company called Computer Communication USA, admitted that he and his conspirators used the firm from 2005 through 2010 to obtain or attempt to get various nuclear-related devices and equipment. The items, which included radiation detection devices, resins for coolant water purification and calibration and switching equipment, had a value of more than $400,000. The Justice Department said Akhtar took direction from the owner of a trading company located in Karachi who had business relationships with Pakistani government entities. It said Akhtar's coconspirators included individuals in Pakistan, the United Arab Emirates and New York associated with the owner of the Pakistani trading company. Washington has long been concerned with Pakistan's nuclear program, which included the development of atomic weapons and added to regional tensions with its longtime rival, India. Akhtar faces a maximum sentence of five years in prison and a $250,000 fine at his sentencing scheduled on Jan. 6 http://arabnews.com/world/article499708.ece (Return to Articles and Documents List)

BarentsObserver – Norway Maiden Voyage for World’s most Heavy Armed Submarine After 18 years of construction, Russia’s first multi-armed Graney-class nuclear powered submarine set course to the White Sea on Monday for the first sea trails. September 9, 2011 The submarine, named "Severodvinsk", has world-record in construction delays. The first welding work with the hull started back in December 1993 following blueprints and drawings that still had the USSR-stamps. According to the first plans, the submarine was to be launched in 1995 and commissioned for the navy in 1998. The submarine however went on its first sea trails Monday this week. The short press-release posted by the Sevmash construction yard reads that the submarine at this voyage will carry out her first sea trails. If the sea trails are successful, "Severodvinsk" is expected to enter service with the navy by the end of this year, as previously reported by BarentsObserver.

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

"Severodvinsk" is the first of Russia’s new fourth generation multi-purpose submarines of the Graney-class. The submarine is the most heavily multi-armed submarine put to sea since the Oscar-II class. While the Oscar-II class, like the ill-fated Kursk submarine, can carry cruise-missiles with a limited range, the new Graney-class carries a variety of long-range cruise missiles. The new missiles is by RIA Novosti said to have a range of up to 5,000 kilometres. Due to the missiles long-range, the submarine is rather to be categorized as a sub-strategic weapon than a traditional attack submarine. The press-note posted at the portal of Sevmash says nothing about any weapon tests at this week’s first sea trails of "Severodvinsk." Fully armed, the submarine can carry 24 cruise missiles and eight torpedo launchers. The cruise missiles onboard can be both tipped with conventional warheads or nuclear warheads. http://www.barentsobserver.com/maiden-voyage-for-worlds-most-heavy-armed-submarine.4958641-58932.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

The Hill – Washington, D.C. Lawmakers Ask Obama to Shield Nuke Programs from Funding Cuts By John T. Bennett September 10, 2011 A House Armed Services subcommittee chairman wants President Obama to ask lawmakers to ensure several key nuclear weapon programs are not hit with a funding cut until a 2012 Pentagon spending bill is passed. Armed Forces Strategic Forces subcommittee Chairman Mike Turner (R-Ohio) and panel member Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), in a letter that will be sent to the White House on Monday, will ask President Obama to repeat an action he took last year: requesting a funding “anomaly” for a list of nuclear weapon programs. The move is needed to keep “on track the tight schedule for infrastructure modernization and life extensions of our current warhead types” should Congress fail to pass a Pentagon appropriations bill before Oct. 1, Turner writes in the letter, obtained Friday by The Hill. Like last year, the passage of annual spending bills by the Sept. 30 end of the fiscal year looks unlikely, several senior lawmakers said this week. And like last fall, that means the Pentagon will be funded for at least several months by a continuing resolution. House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) told reporters Wednesday that he expects a final 2012 Defense Department spending bill likely will be the vehicle on which a government-wide funding measure is attached. But that might not happen for months, meaning a Pentagon stopgap is inevitable. “The object of the anomaly is to fund things at the *fiscal year 2012+ level for the duration of the continuing resolution,” a House staffer said via email Friday. Turner and Heinrich want the Obama administration to send Congress an anomaly request covering the same nuclear programs as covered by last year’s version. But the duo wants this year’s anomaly to cover that and more. “While the administration did not ask for, or receive, an anomaly for the … naval reactor or nonproliferation programs in [fiscal year 2011], we fully support a broader anomaly this year and will work with your administration to see that it is provided by the Congress for as long as the federal government is operating under a [continuing resolution+ in *fiscal year 2012+,” the House lawmakers wrote. The lawmakers said the president’s goal of securing loose nuclear material would be at risk if funding is not preserved.

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

“The administration’s goal of securing all vulnerable nuclear material within four years, and the vital naval reactor development activities to support the Ohio ballistic missile submarine replacement program all require the stability provided by an anomaly, as do the weapons activities for which [the National Nuclear Security Administration+ is responsible,” according to the letter. The Ohio-class submarine replacement program is one of the Navy’s top acquisition priorities. http://thehill.com/news-by-subject/defense-homeland-security/180727-lawmakers-ask-obama-to-shield-nuke- programs-from-funding-cuts (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Business Insider For the First Time in Decades the Navy Is Building Two Nuclear Submarines Simultaneously By Robert Johnson September 12, 2011 General Dynamics Friday announced it has begun construction on its second Virginia-class ballistic-missile attack submarine in 2011. For the first time in 22-years the Navy has started building two subs of the same class in the same year, naval officials say the dual construction process will save time and money. When complete the SSN-788 and SSN-789, will bring the total number of Virginias in the American fleet to 13. The nuclear subs carry 40 weapons, special operations forces, unmanned undersea vehicles, and contain an Advanced SEAL Delivery System (ASDS). Aviation Week pegs the new boats at $1.2 million, while previous vessels ran at $1.8 billion apiece. The new procurement strategy is the Navy's way of trying to lower costs of its next generation submarine commanders hope will replace its Virginia fleet. Submarines ranked the third highest military expense between 1998 and 2008 with -- $16.2 billion spent on contracts and modifications. This amount does not include the amount spent on the nuclear reactors propelling the subs. http://www.businessinsider.com/navy-building-two-these-nuclear-submarines-at-the-same-time-2011-9 (Return to Articles and Documents List)

RIA Novosti – Russian Information Agency U.S., Romania Set to Sign Missile Shield Agreement 13 September 2011 The United States will sign on Tuesday an agreement with Romania on the deployment of elements of its missile shield, the U.S. Department of State said. "On Tuesday, September 13, 2011, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Romanian Foreign Minister Teodor Baconschi will sign the Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of Romania on the Deployment of the Ballistic Missile Defense System in Romania," the statement said.

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

"This legally-binding agreement will allow for the establishment and operation of a U.S. land-based SM-3 ballistic missile defense system in Romania," the statement added. Romania announced earlier this year that it had reached a preliminary agreement with the United States to deploy a U.S. missile interceptor system at a disused Soviet airbase on its territory. Russia then issued an urgent request for legal guarantees from the United States that its missile shield will not target Russia's strategic nuclear forces. Russia has retained staunch opposition to the planned deployment of U.S. missile defense systems near its borders, claiming they would be a security threat. NATO and the United States insist that the shield would defend NATO members against missiles from North Korea and Iran and would not be directed at Russia. WASHINGTON, September 13 (RIA Novosti) http://en.rian.ru/world/20110913/166800153.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Economic Times – India 13 September, 2011 By Asian News International (ANI) Now, a Handheld Device to Sniff Out Nuclear Bomb in a Suitcase WASHINGTON: Researchers at the Northwestern University have developed new materials that could lead to a handheld device for detecting nuclear weapons and materials, such as a "bomb in a suitcase". "The terrorist attacks of 9/11 heightened interest in this area of security, but the problem remains a real challenge," said lead researcher Mercouri G. Kanatzidis. Kanatzidis and his colleagues designed promising semiconductor materials that, once optimized, could be a fast, effective and inexpensive method for detecting dangerous materials such as plutonium and uranium. They developed the new materials from heavy elements that, when struck by gamma rays, excite the electrons, making them mobile and thus detectable. Because every element has a particular spectrum, the signal identifies the suspect material. The problem the researchers faced was that the heavy elements have a lot of mobile electrons, so electrons excited by gamma radiation are hard to detect. "It's like having a bucket of water and adding one drop -- the change is negligible," Kanatzidis said. "We needed a heavy element material without a lot of electrons. This doesn't exist naturally so we had to design a new material," he added. The two new semiconductor materials - cesium-mercury-sulfide and cesium-mercury-selenide - operate at room temperature, and the process is scaleable. "Our materials are very promising and competitive. With further development, they should outperform existing The finding will be published in the September 22 issue of the journal Advanced Materials. http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/news-by-industry/et-cetera/now-a-handheld-device-to-sniff-out- nuclear-bomb-in-a-suitcase/articleshow/9967663.cms (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Washington Times September 9, 2011 World Stability Depends On American Might Military adaptation at core of complex road to victory By Maj. Gen. William A. Chambers Sept. 11, 2001, seems like yesterday. Millions of Americans likely feel the same way. The image of that day indelibly printed in my mind is the stark and sordid cloud of smoke I saw billowing against the pure, azure sky when I looked over my shoulder as I evacuated the Pentagon. That image rushed into my mind ever so briefly when, once again, I felt the Pentagon shudder during the earthquake that recently struck the Eastern United States. On Sept. 11 10 years ago, however, I instantly knew that the cruel, deep-black-velvet cloud of burning petroleum meant that fellow service members and colleagues were not going home to their families that night. Many things changed for America and its friends around the world on Sept. 11. Institutions including the Air Force also changed. During the decade that followed, I served in Washington, Afghanistan and Europe alongside thousands of American troops who have answered the call to defend our nation as part of the most capable force in the world. I've watched those airmen respond to post-Sept. 11 challenges, the scope and variety of which boggle the mind. The adaptability, resourcefulness, resiliency and flexibility of the Air Force and its sister services were distinctly suited for a decade of extraordinary complexity. Like a well-trained Olympic decathlete, your military has excelled at the short sprint while showing the world it also can run long and throw deep. Smart athletes pick themselves up, dust off and finish stronger in each new race. Such multitasked excellence comes with hard lessons. We became more of an expeditionary, quick-reaction force to protect America abroad. Airmen learned quickly how to orchestrate fire from above and respond within minutes to the call from commanders on the ground in contact with the enemy. Pilots and aircrews saved lives on the toughest terrain in the world - in a landlocked country 7,000 miles away. Beyond that daily air and ground choreography, your Air Force struck with punishing persistence, flying remotely piloted aircraft from halfway around the world to attack the network of those planning further attacks on America and its friends. While your military surged for the counterinsurgency and counterterrorism fight, this decade also saw it awake anew to the critical need for the long view, the need to keep strong the ability to go deep, the need to remind all adversaries that America carries a big stick. So, there are some things that have not changed, for it is America's passion to prevent wars that is at the core of why America has an Air Force. And preventing wars means altering adversaries' decision calculus so they never again attempt to harm our homeland or our friends, especially with weapons of mass destruction, which still pose an existential threat to our nation. Indeed, it is our deterrent force that has kept major-power conflict at bay for more than 65 years. As a steward of the most powerful weapons in history, the Air Force has restored its full commitment - in resources and airmen - to the no-fail mission of maintaining a safe, secure and effective nuclear deterrent. The underlying stability of the world order rests on the strong arm and the global reach of the longest-enduring democratic republic in history. Such strength, such reach - offering succor while projecting power - requires our collective commitment of resources and sacrifice. That's a worthy price to pay so that our kids and grandkids will hear, loud and clear, the sound of freedom overhead. Maj. Gen. William A. Chambers is the U.S. Air Force's assistant chief of staff for strategic deterrence and nuclear integration. http://www.demossnews.com/americanbible/pdfs/9.09.11_washtimes_special_section_sept11.pdf (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Huffington Post OPINION Keeping Nuclear Terrorism a Threat Only in Theory By Mark Fitzpatrick and Nigel Inkster September 11, 2011 On September 11, as the world mourns the deaths in New York and Washington of ten years ago, some solace might be found in noting that the events that day are still the world's most deadly terrorist attack to date. Osama bin Laden did not subsequently fulfill his self-professed religious obligation to obtain nuclear weapons. The "nuclear hell storm" that Al Qaeda operative Khalid Sheik Mohammed said would be unleashed if bin Laden was killed has not come to pass. There has not been a single incident of nuclear terrorism, even using a radiation- spreading dirty bomb. The freedom from nuclear terrorism that the world has enjoyed is due, no doubt, to some combination of the competence of concerned governments and the incompetence of those who seek to inflict mass harm. Luck has also played a role. In light of the potential demand for nuclear materials by terrorists and the black market supply, the odds of terrorist nuclear attack occurring somewhere in the world are still far too high. On the demand side, Al Qaeda may be on the run. But there are still plenty of violent extremist groups which to varying degrees share Al Qaeda's ideology and intent to cause harm. Copycat wannabes and lone wolves also present a threat. Although constructing even crude nuclear weapons requires a level of knowledge and organizational sophistication beyond the reach of most terrorist networks, even a single operative can find ways to misuse radiological material for terrorist purpose. Anders Breivik, perpetrator of the July 22 Oslo twin attacks, devoted 42 pages of his "manifesto" to nuclear and radiological terrorism. His intent on high-impact terrorism and his understanding of the hurdles and consequences inherent in a radiological attack are ample warning of the genuine possibility of such an event. On the supply side, the global stockpile of fissile material is sufficient for 100,000 nuclear weapons. Ominously, production is increasing in places such as Pakistan where the terrorism threat will remain high for some time to come. Radiological sources, used for treating cancer and in other common applications but which can be used for dirty bombs to spread radiation, number upwards of a million. Nuclear terrorism includes attacks on nuclear facilities something Breivik analyzed in some detail. Think Fukushima a la Al-Zawahiri. And Fukushima notwithstanding, more countries plan to introduce nuclear power to meet rising energy needs, diversify sources of supply and minimize carbon emissions. Fortunately, the world is largely united in recognizing the terrorist threat. At the Nuclear Security Summit in April 2010, leaders from 47 countries endorsed President Barack Obama's four-year goal of putting all nuclear material out of reach of terrorist hands. The participating countries also made specific pledges toward meeting that goal and implementation of those pledges has been solid: 60% fulfilled, according to one private assessment, and 30% partial fulfillment. The UK, for example, followed through on its pledges by ratifying two key international conventions on nuclear security, by contributing to a nuclear security fund operated by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and by inviting a nuclear security review from the IAEA. A second nuclear security summit to be held in Seoul next March will review the commitments made in 2010, in the expectation that the meeting will serve as an action-forcing event. Yet those pledges were easy pickings for the most part. To meet the goal of securing all nuclear material, states must do more to identify nuclear security gaps and then to plug them. The nuclear security summit process is a useful way of maintaining focused global attention to the nuclear terrorism threat and the means of averting it. A global response is needed because any nuclear terrorist attack is likely to have international roots and most certainly will have global repercussions catastrophic in nature. States

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530 that have not yet ratified the amended convention on standards for physical protection of nuclear materials and facilities (the laggards include the US, Canada, and many EU members) should do so quickly so that the instrument can enter into force. The use of highly enriched uranium for reactors and other civil applications should be phased out. Radiological materials should be strictly licensed and accounted for. By taking individual and collective steps to secure nuclear and radiological material and by also continuing to hamper the demand side, the international community can see to it that 9-11 continues to be the worst terrorist attack ever. Mark Fitzpatrick and Nigel Inkster are respectively Director of the Non-Proliferation and Disarmament Programme and Director of Transnational Threats and Political Risk at the International Institute for Strategic Studies. Fitzpatrick was formerly US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Non-Proliferation. Inkster was formerly Assistant Chief and Director for Operations and Intelligence in the British Secret Intelligence Service. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-fitzpatrick/nuclear-terrorism-september-11_b_957575.html?ref=tw (Return to Articles and Documents List)

South Asian News Agency (SANA) – Pakistan OPINION Turning Up the Heat South Asian News Agency (SANA) September 12, 2011 By Asif Ezdi Ever since Pakistan’s decision in June 2009 to block the commencement of negotiations in the Conference on Disarmament (CD) on the conclusion of a treaty to ban the production of fissile material for weapons purposes, the country has come under severe pressure from Washington to give up the veto that every participating state enjoys by virtue of the consensus rule. Pakistan has demanded that the treaty should address not only the future production of the bomb-making material, as the US would like, but also existing stocks held by the nuclear powers. This position is supported by several countries like Iran, Brazil, Myanmar, Indonesia, Colombia and Ukraine, but Pakistan has been alone in the 65-nation body in making this demand a precondition. Being much smaller than India, and inferior to it in conventional forces, Pakistan has to depend for its security largely upon the credibility of its nuclear deterrent. Because of the larger stocks of fissile material that India holds, Pakistan has some catching up to do, especially in plutonium required for the production of more compact nuclear weapons. A Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT), which Washington and its friends are pushing, would however freeze that gap in perpetuity to Pakistan’s disadvantage, while the Indian nuclear weapons programme is being aided by the decision of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) taken in 2008 under US initiative to exempt India from the restrictions on the supply of nuclear fuel and equipment to non-NPT countries. The credibility of Pakistan’s nuclear deterrent is threatened also by India’s strategy (“Cold Start”) of launching lightening thrusts into Pakistani territory using conventional forces, without crossing Pakistan’s nuclear threshold; and by India’s plans to develop a Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) system. India’s efforts to neutralise Pakistan’s nuclear deterrent are hardly surprising. What is remarkable is that the US and its allies and partners are also pursuing policies that threaten to erode the strategic balance in South Asia, leaving Pakistan with no choice but to take appropriate measures to upgrade its nuclear deterrent, and pushing the region into an arms race. What the US should have been doing to promote peace and stability in South Asia is to take Pakistan’s security concerns on board and try to accommodate them. Instead, Washington has chosen to turn up the heat on Pakistan. Relentless and mounting pressure is being applied, bilaterally, through third countries and in multilateral fora, to compel Pakistan to agree to the immediate commencement of FMCT negotiations in the CD.

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

In a speech in the CD last February, Clinton accused Pakistan of abusing the consensus principle and warned that US patience was “not infinite”. If negotiations were not begun in the CD, she declared, the US was determined to pursue “other options”. Bilaterally, the US has raised the issue of FMCT negotiation in its “strategic dialogue” with Pakistan. It is now expected to be taken up by the Americans strongly when Gilani meets Clinton during his visit later this month to New York to address the UN General Assembly. There is a possibility that Obama might link his visit to Pakistan, which was at one time being considered for late 2011, with concessions by Pakistan on the FMCT and other issues. Even more important than bilateral pressure, the US has sought to enlist Chinese backing. There was much satisfaction when in August 2009, shortly after Pakistan announced its decision to block FMCT negotiations, China called for work on the treaty to start as soon as possible. At a meeting in the following month with Ellen Tauscher, US Under Secretary for Disarmament, a senior British official gloated – somewhat prematurely – that China had “dumped” Pakistan in the CD. As part of the campaign to pressure Pakistan, a high-level conference on “revitalising multilateral disarmament negotiations” was held in September last year at the UN General Assembly. A follow-up conference in July this year duplicated this exercise. At these meetings, Pakistan came in for criticism from several delegations and from the UN Secretary General for “abusing the consensus principle”. Several countries suggested that the option of negotiating the FMCT outside the CD – such as in an ad hoc committee of the General Assembly, or a UN conference – should be considered. This was opposed by Pakistan, China, and a number of developing countries. The Pakistan delegation also made it clear at the July meeting that Pakistan would not join any such process, nor would it consider accession to any treaty concluded through such a process. Although the US has been speaking for more than a year of pursuing “other options” to conclude the FMCT, it has not yet spelt out the precise mechanism. The reason is that there are no easy options at all. Washington has been consulting its allies and partners but has not yet found a broadly acceptable approach. Among the five permanent members of the Security Council (P-5), China is the main opponent of taking the matter away from the CD. There are different views even within the US administration. Some are wary of taking the matter outside the CD, especially to the General Assembly, where decisions are taken by vote. Instead, they favour exerting more pressure on Pakistan, bilaterally and through Beijing, to bring it to heel. Even the threat to walk away from the CD has been made partly in the expectation that it would induce Beijing to persuade Islamabad to give up its objections to negotiating the FMCT in the CD. If that does not work, the US would favour “a P-5 led process outside the CD that could open the door down the road to a negotiating process”. One plan under consideration is to create a ‘Contact Group’ of the P-5 and other countries like Germany, Japan and Brazil which possess nuclear technology, as well as India, to hold initial technical discussions outside the CD, before returning the matter to the CD for formal negotiations at a later stage. This would build on a Japan-Australia initiative this year under which the two countries organised technical discussions on the margins of the CD in preparation for future negotiations. China and Pakistan did not attend these meetings. Under US initiative, the P-5 have held two meetings in the last few months to promote FMCT negotiations. Significantly, the press statement issued after their second meeting, held on August 30, spoke of their determination to conclude the treaty at the earliest possible date “in the CD”. Further meetings of the P-5, with the participation of “other relevant parties”, are now planned during the General Assembly session beginning tomorrow (September 13). The FMCT is currently the top US priority in multilateral nuclear disarmament. The US aim, needless to say, is not only to conclude the FMCT but also to ensure that Pakistan becomes a party to it. That gives Pakistan considerable leverage which it should be using to back its demand for equality of treatment with India with regard to access to peaceful nuclear technology, exemption from the NSG guidelines and membership of export control regimes.

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

After the FMCT, the next item on the US disarmament agenda will be the ratification and entry into force of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). Pakistan has so far made its signature of the treaty conditional upon India doing the same. We now need to review this position in light of Washington’s rejection of the Pakistani demand for arrangements similar to the India-US nuclear deal. Instead of whining about discriminatory policies and pleading for fair treatment, we should make it clear to Washington that Pakistan will not sign the CTBT unless it is also given the same rights and status as India in nuclear matters. Since the treaty cannot become effective without Pakistan becoming a party, Washington would then have to choose between the entry into force of the CTBT and continuing with its double standards. If it is wise, it will choose the former. The writer is a former member of the Pakistan Foreign Service. http://www.sananews.net/english/2011/09/turning-up-the-heat/ (Return to Articles and Documents List)

World Politics Review OPINION/Briefings Explaining Libya to Iran By Alexander Bollfrass 12 September 2011 Eight years after Moammar Gadhafi gave up his mail-order nuclear weapons program and chemical munitions in exchange for détente with the West, he has been chased from power by a ragtag rebel army backed by Western airpower. Chances are that Gadhafi regrets his decision to forgo his WMD programs. If he had been armed with nuclear or chemical weapons, NATO might not have intervened when he threatened to massacre his own people. While Gadhafi's fall is good news, the end of the eccentric colonel's dictatorship now heightens the challenge of getting the Irans and North Koreas of the world to give up their nuclear ambitions in exchange for better relations with the West. Before the bombs started falling on Tripoli, the intellectual and legal momentum behind such an intervention had been building for years. Through the work of academics and humanitarian advocates, the idea known as the "responsibility to protect," or R2P, has emerged as an increasingly mainstream norm among Western policymakers. R2P emphasizes the responsibility of states to protect their populations and permits international intervention if a government is unable or unwilling to prevent mass atrocities against its people. In March, the international community did not dither when Gadhafi appeared to be preparing a massacre in Benghazi. R2P was used to justify the first U.N.-sanctioned humanitarian intervention in a sovereign country against the wishes of its government. The architects of the intervention were some of the very same countries that had convinced Gadhafi to give up his weapons of mass destruction eight years earlier: France, Britain and the United States. Parallel to the humanitarian community's development of the R2P doctrine, another community of foreign policy thinkers, those worried about the spread of nuclear weapons, had worked to promote an idea with very different implications for sovereignty. They reached the conclusion that fear of outside intervention was among the many factors driving governments to build weapons of mass destruction. For this reason, they argued, it was necessary to assuage that fear with the offer of a security guarantee once the government could prove it had abandoned its WMD ambitions. In Libya, this security-assurance principle successfully brought the archpariah of the 1980s back into the international fold in 2003. The contradictory doctrinal developments in humanitarian and security circles are not abstract intellectual exercises; they have practical implications. In light of the Islamic Republic's crushing of the Green Movement in 2009, it takes little imagination to see a Libya-like situation emerge in Iran. Iranian leaders weighing the pros and

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530 cons of coming clean over their country's nuclear program might look closely at what happened to Gadhafi after he surrendered his weapons program. They might also consider Saddam Hussein and his nonexistent weapons of mass destruction, while contrasting both these dictators with Kim Jong Il and his unpunished nuclear roguery and human rights violations. They might come to the conclusion that nuclear weapons are useful. In fact, we need not speculate about such a scenario, for this is essentially what Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said at the start of the Libyan campaign. The Iranians are not the only ones learning this lesson, one that sets the stage for a future in which nuclear weapons are prized as a counterweight to the threat of international intervention represented by R2P and its inherent challenge to state sovereignty. Instead of greater openness and West-friendly behavior, the response of the rogue states would be deeper retrenchment under the cover of asymmetric WMD capabilities. How can the West make clear that these governments do not need such weapons to protect themselves, while at the same time emphasizing that mass violence against civilians is intolerable? After Libya, it will no longer be credible to issue security guarantees while denying the possibility of a future humanitarian intervention. Therefore, the least-bad option is to explicitly address R2P in any future bargaining to bring proliferators in from the cold. When forgoing regime change in exchange for the verified renunciation of weapons of mass destruction, the West should include a clause in any agreements negotiated with these nations that they do not have carte blanche with their populations and that mass atrocities might still provoke an intervention. Such an R2P clause might make these bargains harder to strike, but it would squarely address the elephant in the negotiating room. While nuclear and other indiscriminately destructive weapons might seem to offer short-term protection against an interventionist West, they cannot protect abusive regimes against their own people in the long run. The Soviet Union's massive nuclear arsenal did nothing to prevent its disappearance, nor did apartheid South Africa's nuclear arms uphold its system of racial oppression. That is not to minimize the grave threat that weapons of mass destruction pose to global security. Every available tool -- including security assurances -- must be used to combat them. Yet these assurances cannot be absolute, and must make it clear that mass violence against civilians will not be tolerated under any circumstances. Alexander K. Bollfrass is a visiting scholar at the Stimson Center. He has written widely on nuclear weapons, including as a former reporter for Arms Control Today, a contributor to the Washington Post and as the co-editor of two books on nuclear disarmament. http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/9970/explaining-libya-to-iran (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Kuwait Times – Kuwait OPINION/Analysis A Decade On, Pakistan Wavering September 12, 2011 By John Chalmers While the ruins of New York's World Trade Center were still smouldering in late Sept 2001, President George W Bush put nations around the globe on notice: "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists". It was an ultimatum that Pakistan's then-president, Gen Pervez Musharraf, felt acutely as Washington readied for war against the Taleban regime next door in Afghanistan. In his memoirs, he recalls being told by the Americans that "if we chose the terrorists, then we should be prepared to be bombed back to the Stone Age".

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Musharraf ditched the Taleban and threw Pakistan's lot in with the United States, making it a strategic ally in the "global war on terror", despite quiet misgivings among his top brass in the powerful military establishment. Over the decade since then, however, Pakistan has been an erratic and reluctant ally. Trust has crumbled on both sides and, with tensions now running high, it is clear that Islamabad increasingly sees Washington as more of a foe than a friend. "I'm very pessimistic," said Bruce Reidel, who advised US President Barack Obama on policy on Afghanistan and Pakistan. "We're on a downward slide towards a more hostile relationship. Obama wants to save it, but our interests don't coincide. The dangers could be enormous if Washington fails to arrest the deterioration in relations with Pakistan, a nuclear-armed but largely dysfunctional state run by a feckless, military-cowed government and teeming with Islamist militants. At stake are the fight against terrorism, the security of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal and - as Islamabad plays off its friendship with China against the United States - regional stability. The United States and Pakistan have cooperated for decades, first against the Soviet Union and then the Al-Qaeda network. But anti-Americanism runs deep in Pakistan, in part because of Washington's perceived tilt towards arch- rival, India, but also because of a sense -heightened by the invasion of Iraq in 2003 - that the United States is a threat to the Muslim world. The US invasion of Iraq, coming on top of US support for Israel and growing ties with India, greatly strengthened the vague and inchoate but pervasive feeling among Pakistanis that 'Islam is in danger' at the hands of the US," wrote Anatol Lieven of the War Studies Department of King's College, London, in a new book, "Pakistan, a Hard Country". Lieven found that an "absolutely overwhelming majority" of Pakistanis, including the country's elites, do not believe 9/11 was the work of Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaeda. Many are convinced the attacks were in fact a plot by the Bush administration, Israel, or both, to provide a pretext for the US invasion of Afghanistan as part of a strategy to dominate the Muslim world. Majid Qurashi, a hospital doctor in the militancy-plagued city of Peshawar on the road to Afghanistan, recently voiced the sentiments many Pakistanis felt on Sept 11, 2001. "When I saw the planes crash into the tower, I thought that, finally, someone had decided to teach the United States a lesson and respond to all the bad things it had been doing around the world," he told Reuters. India has been Pakistan's enemy No. 1 since the violent partition of the subcontinent in 1947. However, hostility towards the United States has grown, reaching new heights after US Navy SEALs killed bin Laden at his Pakistan hideout in May. Another irritant has been the US drone campaign against militants in Pakistan's tribal badlands on the border with Afghanistan, which Islamabad complains have killed civilians and only encouraged public sympathy for the groups sheltering there. A Pew Research Center survey of Pakistanis in June found that 69 percent saw the United States as an enemy and 47 percent were "very" worried about a military threat from Washington. Distrust of Washington is most marked in the army, where there is a sense that - from the Cold War to the war on terrorism - the United States has used Pakistan as a means to pursue its own security interests. Hussain Haqqani, Islamabad's envoy to Washington, recently asked an audience of mainly military officers by a show of hands, "what is the principle national security threat to Pakistan?": a majority named the United States. One of the generals who attended a meeting with Musharraf days after 9/11 said that none of the officers openly questioned his decision to side with the United States, but some reminded him "that Americans have a habit of pulling the rug from under our feet once their interests are served". "America is after our nuclear assets," said the now-retired general, who asked not to be named. "It wants to create chaos in Pakistan to force the United Nations to say Pakistan is an unstable state and cannot secure its nuclear weapons and the international community should take control of these weapons. There is mounting frustration with the relationship on the US side too, and calls for an end to the security and economic funds that Pakistan receives from Washington, which have added up to some $20 billion since 2001. Last week the White House hailed Pakistan's capture of a top Al-Qaeda figure as an example of counter-terrorism

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530 cooperation. But it was a rare moment of entente amid US accusations that Pakistan plays a double game over militants on its soil. For many, the fact that bin Laden had been holed up for years in a house just a couple of hours up the road from Islamabad and near a Pakistani military academy said it all. Pakistan denies any collusion with Al-Qaeda and regularly reminds Washington that it has paid the highest price in human life and money supporting the US war on militancy. However, the root of the trust deficit lies with Pakistan's intelligence agency, the ISI, which has a long history of nurturing militant groups to fight India. Pakistan also stands accused of shielding on its own soil Afghan Taleban, the Haqqani network and others that battle US troops in Afghanistan to guarantee that it has a proxy stake in any political settlement there when American forces withdraw. Let me be clear: many Americans died in Afghanistan because of Pakistan's ISI," US senator and naval reservist Mark Kirk fumed this week after an assignment in Afghanistan, proposing "an American tilt" towards India to encourage Delhi to bankroll an Afghan government that could fight terrorism and the ISI. Ayesha Siddiqa, an expert on the Pakistani military, said the United States and Pakistan have reached a point of strategic divergence as the moment for Afghanistan to stand on its own approaches. "They can no longer agree on the endgame in Afghanistan," she said. "Both are trying to get the maximum out of each other before that comes. Embarrassed and feeling betrayed by the secret raid on bin Laden, Pakistan has cut back on US counter-insurgency trainers in the country and placed limits on CIA activities there. Washington responded by suspending about one- third of its $2.7 billion annual defence aid to Islamabad. In a sign that Pakistan is looking to use its amity with China as a lever in its troubled relationship with Washington, when the prime minister made his first address to the nation on the bin Laden incident he seized the opportunity to lavish praise on "our all-weather friend". But Beijing's friendship will only go so far. There is no sign that China is ready to shoulder the financial cost of propping up Pakistan that the United States has so far been willing to bear, and it will calculate that getting too close would tighten strategic ties between Washington and New Delhi, stoking regional tensions. Despite the tit- for-tat diplomatic sniping between them, Pakistan and the United States are trying to prevent a breakdown of relations. It is proving hard but, for now, both need each other too much to abandon their strategic alliance. The United States and Pakistan are going to need to continue to cooperate on counter-terrorism, whether they like it or not," said Stephen Tankel of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in an online discussion last week. "Both sides are not prepared to walk away from the relationship but are beginning to reassess what the nature of that relationship should be going forward." – Reuters http://www.kuwaittimes.net/read_news.php?newsid=MzQ1NjMzMjM2OA== (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Issue No. 940, 13 September 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530