Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 Articles & Other Documents:

Featured Article: U.S. Preparing for Tactical Nuclear Cuts in Future Arms Deal with Russia

1. Iran to Hold War Games in Int'l Waters 2. Iran Rejects US Allegation on Al-Qaeda Operative 3. MP Describes Navy Wargames as Serious Warning to Western Powers 4. 1st VP: No Single Drop of Oil Will Pass through Hormuz Strait if Iran Oil Is Banned 5. 'Speculation of Israel's Nuclear Arms Deters Iran' 6. Iran Warns of Closing Strategic Hormuz Oil Route 7. S. Korea, China to 'Swiftly Reinvigorate' Efforts to Resume Six-Party Talks 8. In New N.Korea Leader, Rare Exposure to World 9. N Korea Likely to Resume Nuclear Game in Spring of 2012: Experts 10. Who Is in Charge of N.Korea's Nuclear Weapons? 11. US Senator Fears N. Korea Might Try to Sell Nuke Materials 12. N.Korea Closer to Nuclear-Tipped Missile: U.S. Expert 13. Pakistani Government Defends Nuclear Program Against Rising Internal Criticism 14. Pakistan, India Come Closer on Nuclear CBMs 15. U.N. Urges Libya to Sell Off Cache of ‘Yellowcake’ Uranium 16. Russia Successfully Test Fires Bulava Missiles 17. Russia Reports 25,000 Undersea Radioactive Waste Sites 18. Medvedev: Test of Much-Heralded New Missile Done 19. Russia Test Launches Stiletto Missile 20. Optimism on Missile Defense Agreement Decreasing 21. U.S. Preparing for Tactical Nuclear Cuts in Future Arms Deal with Russia 22. U.S. Missile Shield Deal with Romania Takes Effect 23. Pentagon’s Conventional Prompt-Strike Effort Takes 2012 Funding Hit 24. US Reports Progress on Bioweapons Control 25. How China Thinks About the Future of Cyberspace Conflict 26. Iran’s Views of Its Nuclear Issue 27. Change in NK Policy Needed 28. A Pandora's Box in the Middle East 29. Should Scientists Create Deadly Viruses? Yes, Says Bioethicist 30. START May Be Sunk By a Nuclear Torpedo 31. ‘China More at Risk from US AMD Plans in Pacific’

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. 967, 28 December 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

China Daily – China Iran to Hold War Games in Int'l Waters December 23, 2011 (Xinhua) TEHRAN - Iranian Navy Commander Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari on Thursday announced the upcoming launch of ten-day massive naval exercises in the international waters, the local satellite Press TV reported. Sayyari said at a press conference on Thursday that the naval maneuvers dubbed Velayat 90 will start on Saturday and will cover an area of 2,000 (1,250-mile) km stretching from the east of the Strait of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Aden, the report said. This is the first time that Iran's Navy carries out naval drills in such a vast area, he was quoted as saying. He said that the exercises will manifest Iran's military prowess and defense capabilities in the international waters, convey a message of peace and friendship to regional countries and test the newest military equipment among other objectives, said the report. He added that the newest missile systems and torpedoes will be employed in the maneuvers, adding that the most recent tactics used in subsurface battles will also be demonstrated. Iranian destroyers, missile-launching vessels, logistic vessels, drones and coastal missiles will also be tested, said the Iranian commander, according to the report. Closing Strait of Hurmoz is under full control of Iran, he said but did not mention about the exercise to close it, according to the state IRIB TV website. Earlier this month, Parviz Sorouri, a member of the Iranian Majlis (parliament) National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, said that Iran plans to practice its ability to close the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world's most important passages for exports of crude and oil products from littoral states of Persian Gulf. Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast said later that closing the Strait of Hormuz is not on Iran's agenda. As Iran has announced it several times, the issue of closing the Strait of Hormuz is not on Iran's agenda since Iran believes in upholding the stability and peace of the region," said Mehmanparast. http://europe.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2011-12/23/content_14312353.htm (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Arab News – Saudi Arabia Iran Rejects US Allegation on Al-Qaeda Operative By MITRA AMIRI, Reuters December 25, 2011 TEHRAN: Iran rejected as “completely baseless” US allegations that it was harboring an Al-Qaeda member who is accused of operating as a facilitator and financier for the group from the Islamic Republic, the semi-official Fars news agency reported on Sunday. The United States announced on Thursday that it was establishing a reward of up to $10 million for information leading to Syrian-born Yasin Al-Suri, who is also known as Ezedin Abdel Aziz Khalil. “The American government’s recent unwise scenario regarding Iran’s involvement in the September 11, 2001 attacks and the presence of an Al-Qaeda member in Iran is completely baseless,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast said on Sunday, according to Fars.

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Al-Suri has been accused of helping move money and recruits through Iran to Al-Qaeda leaders in neighboring countries under an agreement between the group and the Iranian government, Senior State Department official Robert Hartung has said. The $10 million bounty was the first offered for an Al-Qaeda financier and is aimed at disrupting a financial network that has operated from within Iran’s borders since 2005, the Treasury Department said. On Friday a federal district court in Manhattan ruled that Iran and Hezbollah materially and directly supported Al- Qaeda in the September 11, 2001 attacks and are legally responsible for damages to hundreds of family members of 9/11 victims who are plaintiffs in the case. “The world should consider the consequences of such irresponsible behavior by American officials ... It is also necessary that the international community shows its deep concerns to the American government,” Mehmanparast said. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called the September 11 attacks on the United States a “big fabrication” by Washington that was used to justify the US war on terrorism. The United States and its Western allies have been locked in a standoff with Iran over its disputed nuclear program, which Washington believes is aimed at producing nuclear weapons but which Tehran says is solely for peaceful purposes. http://arabnews.com/middleeast/article553344.ece (Return to Articles and Documents List)

FARS News Agency – Iran Monday, December 26, 2011 MP Describes Navy Wargames as Serious Warning to Western Powers TEHRAN (FNA) - The ongoing naval wargames in Iran's Southern waters should be seen as a serious warning to the West about the closure of the Strait of Hormoz, a senior Iranian lawmaker said on Monday. "These wargames are a warning to the western countries about the closure of the Strait of Hormoz," member of the parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Commission Zohreh Elahian told FNA on Monday. "If any threat is posed to Iran, the Islamic Republic is capable of closing the Strait of Hormoz," the senior lawmaker reiterated. "The naval drills in the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman display the power and domination of the Islamic Republic of Iran's Navy over the regional waters," she added. "The wargames are related to the power of deterrence, dominance and superiority over the region and are a symbol of the defensive and deterrence power of the Islamic Republic ruling system and (Iranian) Armed Forces," the legislator noted. Iran's naval forces started massive wargames in international waters in the Sea of Oman and the Indian Ocean on Saturday. The naval maneuvers dubbed Velayat 90 are due to cover an area stretching from the East of the Strait of Hormoz in the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Aden for 10 days. During the wargames, the Iranian naval forces will display their latest equipment, achievement and tactics. Earlier, Navy Commander Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari had said that the exercises will manifest Iran's military prowess and defense capabilities in the international waters, convey a message of peace and friendship to the regional countries, and test the newest military equipment among other objectives.

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Iranian officials have recently warned enemies that Iran is entitled to the right to close the strategic oil lifeline as a defensive option against foreign invasion. "The closure of the Strait of Hormuz is not on the Islamic Republic of Iran's agenda (at present), but if threats against Iran come to trample upon the rights of our nation while others use the strait for exporting their oil, then Iran will be entitled to the right to close the Strait of Hormuz," member of the Iranian Parliament Mohammad Taqi Rahbar told FNA earlier this month. "The international conventions reserve such rights for the Islamic Republic of Iran as well," Rahbar underscored. The lawmaker, however, said, "For the time being, the Islamic Republic of Iran has not decided to close the strait, but this (closing the strait) depends on the conditions of the region." Israel and its close ally the United States have recently intensified their war rhetoric against Iran. The two arch foes of the Islamic Republic accuse Iran of seeking a nuclear weapon, while they have never presented any corroborative document to substantiate their allegations. Both Washington and Tel Aviv possess advanced weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear warheads. Iran vehemently denies the charges, insisting that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only. Tehran stresses that the country has always pursued a civilian path to provide power to the growing number of Iranian population, whose fossil fuel would eventually run dry. Iran has, in return, warned that it would target Israel and its worldwide interests in case it comes under attack by the Tel Aviv. The United States has long stressed that military action is a main option for the White House to deter Iran's progress in the field of nuclear technology. Iran has warned that in case of an attack by either the US or Israel, it will target 32 American bases in the Middle East and close the strategic Strait of Hormuz. An estimated 40 percent of the world's oil supply passes through the waterway. http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=9007278958 (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA) – Iran 1st VP: No Single Drop of Oil Will Pass through Hormuz Strait if Iran Oil Is Banned Tuesday, December 27, 2011 Tehran, Dec 27, IRNA – 1st Vice President Mohammad Reza Rahimi said on Tuesday if Iran oil is banned not a single drop of oil will pass through Hormuz Strait. The first vice president was speaking at the 3rd International Forum on Development of Domestic Capabilities' in Tehran. Rahimi said 'We are not interested in any hostility or and our motto is friendship and brotherhood, but westerners are not willing to abandon their plots.'

He reiterated that the enemies will stop their conspiracies only when they receive a crushing response from Iran. http://www.irna.ir/ENNewsShow.aspx?NID=30734965&SRCH=1 (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Jerusalem Post – Israel 'Speculation of Israel's Nuclear Arms Deters Iran' President Peres says that mystery, rumors surrounding Dimona nuclear facility serve as a powerful deterrent. By GREER FAY CASHMAN and JPOST.Com Staff December 27, 2011 Speculation that Israel has atomic weapons at its nuclear plant in Dimona can serve as deterrent enough to temper the aggression of the Jewish State's enemies, including Iran, President Shimon Peres said Tuesday. Speaking at a Jerusalem meeting of ambassadors and consuls serving abroad, the president said that "Iran is very dangerous, but there's no need to get hysterical about the threat it poses." "Israel has been in worse positions," he said, citing as an example the War of Independence, in which Israel emerged triumphant despite ammunition and manpower shortages. It was important, he implied, for Israel's enemies to believe that Israel had the upper hand. In this context he referred to Israel's plant in Dimona. For years no one knew exactly what was going on in Dimona, the president said. People guessed but they didn't know for a fact, and imagination, Peres added, was a sufficient deterrent. Likewise today, no one knows to what extent Israel is capable of dealing with Iran, but with the reputation that Israel has in science and technology, it is imagined that Israel can take care of the Iran problem if necessary, he stated. As he has done many times before, Peres said that Israel should renew negotiations with the Palestinians. Even if the negotiations make slow headway, he said, they will serve to change perceptions of Israel as an occupying power. http://www.jpost.com/IranianThreat/News/Article.aspx?id=251066 (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Denver Post Iran Warns of Closing Strategic Hormuz Oil Route By ALI AKBAR DAREINI, Associated Press December 28, 2011 TEHRAN, Iran—Iran's navy chief warned Wednesday that his country can easily close the strategic Strait of Hormuz at the mouth of the Persian Gulf, the passageway through which a sixth of the world's oil flows. It was the second such warning in two days. On Tuesday, Vice President Mohamed Reza Rahimi threatened to close the strait, cutting off oil exports, if the West imposes sanctions on Iran's oil shipments. With concern growing over a possible drop-off in Iranian oil supplies, a senior Saudi oil official said Gulf Arab nations are ready to offset any loss of Iranian crude. That reassurance led to a drop in world oil prices. In New York, benchmark crude fell 77 cents to $100.57 a barrel in morning trading. Brent crude fell 82 cents to $108.45 a barrel in London. "Closing the Strait of Hormuz is very easy for Iranian naval forces," Adm. Habibollah Sayyari told state-run Press TV. "Iran has comprehensive control over the strategic waterway," the navy chief said. The threats underline Iranian concern that the West is about to impose new sanctions that could target Tehran's vital oil industry and exports. Western nations are growing increasingly impatient with Iran over its nuclear program. The U.S. and its allies have accused Iran of using its civilian nuclear program as a cover to develop nuclear weapons. Iran has denied the

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530 charges, saying its program is geared toward generating electricity and producing medical radioisotopes to treat cancer patients. The U.S. Congress has passed a bill banning dealings with the Iran Central Bank, and President Barack Obama has said he will sign it despite his misgivings. Critics warn it could impose hardships on U.S. allies and drive up oil prices. The bill could impose penalties on foreign firms that do business with Iran's central bank. European and Asian nations import Iranian oil and use its central bank for the transactions. Iran is the world's fourth-largest oil producer, with an output of about 4 million barrels of oil a day. It relies on oil exports for about 80 percent of its public revenues. Iran has adopted an aggressive military posture in recent months in response to increasing threats from the U.S. and Israel that they may take military action to stop Iran's nuclear program. The navy is in the midst of a 10-day drill in international waters near the strategic oil route. The exercises began Saturday and involve submarines, missile drills, torpedoes and drones. The war games cover a 1,250-mile (2,000- kilometer) stretch of sea off the Strait of Hormuz, northern parts of the Indian Ocean and into the Gulf of Aden near the entrance to the Red Sea as a show of strength and could bring Iranian ships into proximity with U.S. Navy vessels in the area. Iranian media are describing how Iran could move to close the strait, saying the country would use a combination of warships, submarines, speed boats, anti-ship cruise missiles, torpedoes, surface-to-sea missiles and drones to stop ships from sailing through the narrow waterway. Iran's navy claims it has sonar-evading submarines designed for shallow waters of the Persian Gulf, enabling it to hit passing enemy vessels. A closure of the strait could temporarily cut off some oil supplies and force shippers to take longer, more expensive routes that would drive oil prices higher. It also potentially opens the door for a military confrontation that would further rattle global oil markets. Iran claimed a victory this month when it captured an American surveillance drone almost intact. It went public with its possession of the RQ-170 Sentinel to trumpet the downing as a feat of Iran's military in a complicated technological and intelligence battle with the U.S. American officials have said that U.S. intelligence assessments indicate the drone malfunctioned. http://www.denverpost.com/war/ci_19630785 (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Yonhap News – South Korea S. Korea, China to 'Swiftly Reinvigorate' Efforts to Resume Six-Party Talks December 23, 2011 SEOUL, Dec. 23 (Yonhap) -- South Korea and China have agreed to work together to "swiftly reinvigorate" diplomatic efforts to revive the stalled six-party talks on ending North Korea's nuclear weapons program, Seoul's chief nuclear envoy said Friday. Lim Sung-nam, Seoul's chief negotiator to the six-nation talks, made the remarks after returning home from a two- day visit to China, where he held four-hour talks with his Chinese counterpart Wu Dawei and other senior officials.

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Lim's trip to China came as North Korea was mourning the death of its leader Kim Jong-il. "During the talks, we agreed to make joint efforts to swiftly reinvigorate the process of efforts to resume the six-party talks," Lim said, describing the talks with Wu as "useful." Lim said he and Wu exchanged views on the situation in North Korea after the sudden demise of Kim and agreed to make joint efforts to help the North maintain stability, suggesting that they desire for a stable transition of power. However, Lim declined to comment on prospects for a resumption of the six-party talks, saying countries involved need to wait and see until North Korea makes a move after its official mourning period for the late Kim ends on Dec. 29. The six-party nuclear talks, which involve the two Koreas, China, Japan, Russia and the U.S., have been dormant since the last session in late 2008. The North Korean leader's death put a brake on a flurry of renewed diplomatic efforts to resume the long-stalled six-party channel. Before Kim's demise, North Korea had been expected to announce its agreement with the United States to suspend its uranium enrichment program and accept U.N. nuclear monitors in exchange for food aid. Such North Korean moves were preconditions set by the U.S. and South Korea for resuming the six-party talks. http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/northkorea/2011/12/23/58/0401000000AEN20111223006600315F.HTML (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Bangkok Post – Thailand In New N.Korea Leader, Rare Exposure to World By Agence France-Presse (AFP) 23 December 2011 North Korea is a famously closed country but new leader Kim Jong-Un is among its few people exposed to the West, which has increasingly hoped that quiet contacts with Pyongyang will ease tensions. The United States has balked at sitting for formal talks with nuclear-armed North Korea and is wary of making any public assessment of late strongman Kim Jong-Il's son and successor, who is in his late 20s and little known. But one of the few policies on North Korea that enjoys growing enthusiasm in Washington is so-called Track Two diplomacy -- US scholars outside government inviting officials from Pyongyang who often know as little about the United States as Americans know about them. Kim Jong-Un studied at schools near Switzerland's capital Bern where authorities described him as "well- integrated, hard-working and ambitious." Bruce Cumings, chairman of the University of Chicago's history department and a prominent scholar on North Korea, noted that communist leaders Deng Xiaoping of China and Ho Chi Minh of Vietnam had lived as young men in Paris. By contrast, neither Kim Jong-Il nor Kim Il-Sung -- North Korea's founder and the new leader's grandfather -- had set foot in the non-communist West, never venturing beyond East Berlin. "So the grandson cannot but be different, having experienced life and school in a free, democratic society, learning English and German," Cumings said. "He is also entirely conversant with the Internet, and is one of the few people in the North who can use it freely," he said.

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Cumings warned it was too early to determine what lessons Kim Jong-Un has taken from his time in Europe and "for some years he will have to defer to much older people -- most of whom are suspicious of outside influences." Cumings said North Korea may also be rattled by watching events overseas including the Arab Spring, particularly the violent death of Libya's leader Moamer Kadhafi who was ousted despite trying to reconcile with the West. North Korea agreed in principle in 2005 and 2007 in talks with the United States, China, Japan, Russia and South Korea to give up its nuclear weapons in return for security guarantees and aid. North Korea stormed out of the talks in 2009, accusing the United States of hostility. China and North Korea have sought new dialogue, but Washington and South Korea's conservative President Lee Myung-Bak have insisted that North Korea first clearly recommit to past agreements and work to ease tensions. North Korea last year shelled a South Korean island and was blamed for torpedoing a warship, incidents that killed a total of 50 people. Despite the problems on the diplomatic front, the State Department has issued visas for senior North Korean officials at the invitation of US universities and think-tanks. In October, eight North Korean officials including Ri Jong-Hyok, the vice chairman of a key committee that handles foreign relations, traveled to the University of Georgia for talks on ways to ease tensions. Han S. Park, a professor at the university who led the Track Two session and is a frequent troubleshooter during crises with North Korea, said that all sides found an interest in keeping up such quiet, off-camera contact, particularly with South Korean and US elections approaching in 2012. "I think there will be more interest on the part of Washington and Seoul to work with the new North Korea," Park said. Park said that he recently spoke to senior officials in Washington who voiced support for Track Two efforts, even though it had taken them months to decide whether to issue visas for the last session. "They were all encouraged by what we accomplished in Georgia and, to my request the United States issue visas to North Koreans in the future, they were more positively inclined," Park said. The United States and North Korea had been expected to meet this week in Beijing for new talks, with President Barack Obama's administration potentially offering food assistance to Pyongyang. But North Korea on Monday made the bombshell announcement of Kim Jong-Il's death and the United States has said that any future talks will wait at least until after the mourning period. Peter Beck, a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, doubted that Obama wanted to invest political capital on North Korea. But he also sensed a growing US willingness to allow visits by North Koreans. "That's one thing that the left and the right in the US can agree on -- that it's a good thing to expose North Koreans to the West and particularly the United States," he said. http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/asia/272197/in-new-n-korea-leader-rare-exposure-to-world (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Yonhap News – South Korea December 23, 2011 N Korea Likely to Resume Nuclear Game in Spring of 2012: Experts By Lee Chi-dong

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

WASHINGTON/HAWAII, Dec. 22 (Yonhap) -- North Korea is likely to restart its typical nuclear gambit in the spring after digesting the death of its leader and taking time for the new power structure to solidify, according to a group of North Korea experts. The North may conduct another nuclear test this spring under a game plan crafted under Kim Jong-il before his death and expected to be carried out by his third son, Kim Jong-un, they said at forum hosted by the East-West Center in Honolulu. "I don’t think we're going to see sudden collapse and instability in North Korea,” said Michael Green, a visiting East-West Center fellow and senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington. He said the situation is likely to be quiet for a few months while the North is in mourning and its new power structure solidifies. Green said he expects that the new leadership will flex its muscles starting as early as the spring or summer. North Korea aims to become a "mighty and prosperous state”in 2012, the centennial of the birth of the founding father Kim Il-sung. "I think what we know about their program suggests pretty strongly that they are preparing for a third nuclear test and maybe missile tests," Green said at the forum earlier this week. "The North Koreans have a game plan to demonstrate then to the world and their people their full nuclear weapons capability." Green served as special assistant to President George W. Bush for national security affairs and senior director for Asian affairs at the National Security Council from 2004 to 2005. The other panelists were East-West Center President Charles Morrison; Ralph Cossa, president of the Pacific Forum CSIS and a board member of the Council on U.S.-Korean Security Studies, and Raymond Burghardt, former deputy chief of mission in South Korea and director of the East-West Seminars program. Cossa said, "North Korea already has a game plan in place and my guess is it will continue along that plan." He said he doubts the effectiveness of talks with North Korea. "If we do go back to talks," he said, "I don't think anyone really expects that it will really lead to denuclearization." He said the talks will probably provide "the appearance of progress," which is important to China and others. "We've so lowered the bar that things will occur that will be declared as breakthroughs that are relatively meaningless," he said. He pointed out the past track record of the North's provocations and negotiations. "They are now in the phase of behaving to see what they can get for not misbehaving and that cycle usually lasts about six months or a year," he said. http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2011/12/23/13/0301000000AEN20111223000100315F.HTML (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Chosun Ilbo – South Korea December 26, 2011 Who Is in Charge of N.Korea's Nuclear Weapons? New North Korean leader Kim Jong-un is taking control of the renegade country's nuclear weapons, Defense Minister Kim Kwan-jin told the National Assembly's Defense Committee last Tuesday. "It also seems that Kim Jong- un has the final say on nuclear weapons considering that the power is being handed over to him now," he added.

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Kim Jong-un is vice chairman of the Workers Party's Central Military Commission, which now commands the military. A South Korean intelligence officer said the North Korean military attaches the greatest importance to the nuclear arms, and Kim Jong-un is now in charge of them. The regime is believed to have about 50 kg of plutonium extracted and up to 10 nuclear bombs, and there was some anxiety abroad who would control them in the power vacuum after former leader Kim Jong-il died. But some experts say the 29-year-old Kim Jong-un has no military background and cannot really be in charge of the nuclear arms. He is nominally only a vice chairman of the commission, appointed alongside Ri Yong-ho, the chief of General Staff. One South Korean government official speculated that Ri probably controls the regime's weapons of mass destruction, including any nuclear bombs. Others believe the commission is collectively in control because it includes all the top military brass. They believe that the first thing the regime did after Kim Jong-il's death was to ensure control of the nuclear weapons. Different agencies in the North take charge of nuclear development and testing, nuclear weapons management and nuclear facilities security. Nuclear development is conducted by the party's Machine-Building Industry Department (formerly Munitions Industry Department). This is why the international community imposed sanctions on Ju Kyu-chang, its director, and Jon Byong-ho, a former director of the Machine-Building Industry Department who is currently director of the Politburo. But the nuclear weapons are reportedly kept and managed by the General Staff led by Ri Yong-ho, which has actual operational control of troops. Security at nuclear facilities, including the Yongbyon uranium enrichment facility, is the job of the State Security Department and the Military Security Command. Kim Jong-il reportedly wanted to prevent nuclear information from being concentrated in any single agency. A source familiar with the North's internal affairs said, "It seems highly likely that Kim Jong-il trained his son how to manage the nuclear weapons." http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2011/12/26/2011122601337.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Arirang News - South Korea December 27, 2011 US Senator Fears N. Korea Might Try to Sell Nuke Materials The top Republican on the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Richard Lugar says he fears that some in North Korea might try to sell the country's nuclear materials or nuclear weapons. Appearing on CNN's 'State of the Union' on Sunday, Lugar put forth nuclear poliferation as his biggest concern regarding the communist state. He stressed that the US should closely track what happens to North Korea's nuclear materials and added that China should decide on whether it will treat the North as one of its provinces. Meanwhile, the Los Angeles Times reported that Pyeongyang is the toughest target for US intelligence agencies to decipher. http://www.arirang.co.kr/News/News_View.asp?nseq=124086&code=Ne2&category=2 (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

The Star – Malaysia N.Korea Closer to Nuclear-Tipped Missile: U.S. Expert By Jim Wolf, Reuters December 28, 2011 WASHINGTON (Reuters) - North Korea likely is closer to mounting nuclear warheads on its ballistic missiles than generally reported, possibly only one or two years away, the Congress's former top expert on the issue has concluded. Larry Niksch, who tracked North Korea for the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service for 43 years, concludes in a new paper that the North probably would need as little as one to two years to miniaturize and mount a nuclear warhead atop its medium-range Nodong missile once it has produced enough highly enriched uranium as the warhead's core fuel. A North Korea armed with nuclear-tipped missiles would rattle East Asia and present new policy and military challenges to the United States and its allies. Trying to determine when Pyongyang will reach that threshold has long been a challenge for the U.S. intelligence community. Niksch's timeline, if correct, puts out a new marker for strategists. Last January, then-U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said the North was within five years of building an intercontinental ballistic missile that, paired with its nuclear program, would be "a direct threat" to the United States. North Korea has staged relatively few missile tests in recent years, suggesting it is still working on perfecting the needed technologies even as it has cooperated with Iran to do so. Its nuclear and missile capabilities are once again in the spotlight as power passes to North Korea's designated young leader, Kim Jong-un, after the December 17 death of his father, Kim Jong-il. Pyongyang already may have produced enough highly enriched uranium (HEU) for a warhead or be close to doing so, Niksch and experts such as Siegfried Hecker, the former head of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, said in interviews with Reuters. Hecker said the North would have to conduct another nuclear test, its third, to have confidence that it had successfully miniaturized a warhead for one of its missiles. "If the test is successful they may be able to have the capability within a couple of years," he said in an email exchange, referring to a nuclear-tipped missile. "We simply don't know what else they have and how much HEU they can make or have made," added Hecker, who toured North Korea's Yongbyon nuclear complex in November 2010, his fourth visit there. Jonathan Pollack, author of the 2011 book No Exit: North Korea, Nuclear Weapons, and International Security, emphasized the many unknowns pending further North Korean nuclear and missile tests. "I think they'd have a reasonable chance of being able to mount a nuclear warhead on a missile in three to five years if they speed up research, development, testing and evaluation," said Pollack, of the Brookings Institution in Washington. "If North Korea achieves some testing successes earlier than I anticipate, it might able to achieve this goal somewhat sooner." The North is reckoned by U.S. intelligence to have between 30 and 50 kilograms of separated plutonium, enough for at least half a dozen nuclear weapons. Plutonium is the other type of fissile material used in nuclear weapons.

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Pyongyang apparently has decided against making more plutonium bombs since it shut down a plutonium production facility at its Yongbyon nuclear complex in July 2007. It did so during six-party nuclear disarmament talks that it has since abandoned. The North may have several plutonium-based nuclear warheads small enough to be mounted on missiles as well as dropped from aircraft, Lieutenant General Ronald Burgess, director of the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency, told the Senate Armed Services Committee March 10. Even with limited HEU production of which the North may already be capable, it could generate enough new bombmaking ingredients for one to two weapons per year, nuclear scientists say. The North has been pursuing nuclear and missile capabilities for strategic deterrence and international prestige as well as for economic and political concessions, Burgess told Congress. "While North Korea may be willing to abandon portions of its nuclear program in exchange for improved relations with the United States, Pyongyang is unlikely to eliminate its nuclear weapons," he said. The Defense Intelligence Agency declined to comment for this article on its estimate for a nuclear-tipped missile, as did the CIA. Non-government experts emphasized the difficulty of pinning down nuclear developments in North Korea, a country distinguished by its opaqueness. NUCLEAR, MISSILE TESTS The North has conducted two tests of a nuclear device, in October 2006 and in June 2009. It has carried out three tests of missiles beyond medium range since 1998. The sole test of its intermediate-range Taepodong-1 overflew Japan and landed in the Pacific in August 1998, falling short of a declared goal of putting a satellite into orbit. But it spurred perhaps billions of dollars of Japanese investment in U.S.-built antimissile hardware and defense services. The maiden flight test of North Korea's longest-range missile, the Taepodong-2, ended in failure about 40 seconds after launch on July 5, 2006. It was tested again in April 2009, when its first stage traveled about 270 km before falling into the Sea of Japan without orbiting a small communications satellite. Niksch predicted North Korea first would mount nuclear warheads on its Nodong and shorter-range Scud missiles, possibly followed by mating them to long-range missiles. He said this would fuel domestic pressure in Japan to develop long-range strike capabilities despite its war-renouncing constitution, and rattle the region. Japan on Monday urged China -- host of the talks that also involved the two Koreas, Russia, Japan and the United States -- to shoulder a big role in making sure that North Korea avoids volatile moves after its announcement of Kim Jong-il's death of a heart attack, apparently at age 69. Constraining North Korea is especially important for Japan, which is well within range of the North's long-range missiles. A.Q. KHAN ROLE Niksch's one- to two-year timeframe for mounting a nuclear warhead is based largely on his assessment of reports about warhead technology shared with Pyongyang by A.Q. Khan, regarded as the father of Pakistan's nuclear bomb. Niksch said in the interview "there can be no doubt" that North Korea received from Khan a blueprint of the nuclear warhead mounted on Pakistan's medium-range Ghauri missile. But Pollack said he did not put much faith in accounts based on information supposedly supplied by A.Q. Khan, a nuclear scientist considered by experts, including Hecker, as an unreliable source.

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Pakistan's Ghauri itself is a twin of Nodong missiles supplied by North Korea before May 1998, when Pakistan tested its first nuclear devices. Pakistan mounted nuclear warheads on its Ghauri missiles within three years, Niksch said in a paper to be published Friday by the Institute of National Security Strategy in Seoul. North Korean nuclear experts were present at six nuclear tests that Pakistan carried out in May 1998 and the North "appears to have received all of the test data," said Niksch, now an advisor to the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. URANIUM ENRICHMENT Hecker, who from 1986 to 1997 headed the Los Alamos National Laboratory that handles U.S. military nuclear research, was shown what he has called "astonishingly modern" uranium enrichment facilities during his November 2010 tour of the Yongbyon complex. The facilities are likely configured to make low enriched uranium for the experimental light-water reactor that he was shown but they could be "readily converted to produce highly enriched uranium bomb fuel," he said in his trip report. The North must have additional centrifuge facilities to have made as much progress in such a short time, including some that may be dedicated to producing HEU bomb fuel, Hecker added in the email exchange. HEU contamination was found by U.S. scientists on aluminum samples and copies of reactor operation documents provided by North Korean officials to U.S. authorities while the six-party talks were progressing, said Hecker. Bruce Lemkin, who from 1997 to 2000 negotiated in and with North Korea on behalf of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization, predicted a dramatic show of military power soon, to "validate" the leadership of Kim Jong-un, who has been picking up new titles in an apparent attempt to signal a power consolidation. "Perhaps it will be another nuclear test detonation or a ballistic missile firing or both, perhaps even with the assertion that North Korea has, indeed, weaponized similar missiles with nuclear devices," said Lemkin, who retired in 2010 as U.S. Air Force deputy undersecretary for international affairs. U.S. officials have a habit of underestimating the North Koreans, Niksch said. "They tend to make more rapid advances in expanding their nuclear weapons program than U.S. experts believe they are capable of," he said. Editing by Warren Strobel and Christopher Wilson http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2011/12/28/worldupdates/2011-12- 28T000539Z_1_TRE7BR009_RTROPTT_0_UK-KOREA-NORTH-NUCLEAR&sec=Worldupdates (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Miami Herald Monday, December 26, 2011 Pakistani Government Defends Nuclear Program Against Rising Internal Criticism By TOM HUSSAIN, McClatchy Newspapers

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan -- A destabilizing confrontation between Pakistan’s fledgling democratic government and its powerful military is turning into a debate over the country’s nuclear weapons program.

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Opposition politicians on Sunday characterized President Asif Zardari as bowing to U.S. policy to roll back Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program. They dredged up his offer in November 2009 to abandon Pakistan’s "first strike" nuclear weapons posture against India, in return for a comprehensive peace agreement. India and Pakistan have fought three wars since gaining independence from British colonial rule in 1947. "Our nuclear weapons are in safe hands, but they are under threat from the policymakers," former Foreign Minister Shah Qureshi said to about 100,000 people at an opposition rally in Karachi. Zardari’s offer to abandon the first-strike policy was rendered irrelevant within days by the November 2009 terrorist attacks on Mumbai, India’s biggest city, carried out by the Pakistan-based terrorist group Lashkar-i-Taiba. The attacks over three days killed 164 people. Subsequent tensions with India prompted Pakistan to rescind the offer. Pakistan adopted a "first-strike" posture in 2000, citing the overwhelming superiority of India’s conventional forces. The attack by Qureshi and another former minister, Asif Ahmad, on the president’s national security credentials came after public tension last week between the government and the military, which sparked fears of a coup. They have clashed over claims by an American businessman, Mansoor Ijaz, that Pakistan’s ambassador to Washington, Hussain Haqqani, had in May asked him to seek White House support against a brewing military coup. Ijaz said he believed Haqqani had acted at the behest of the Pakistani president. The affair is currently under investigation by Pakistan’s parliament and Supreme Court. The Pakistani government dismissed the allegations, and was infuriated when its army chief and military intelligence chief last week submitted statements to the Supreme Court asserting that they believed Ijaz’s claims to be true. The military position portrayed the government as surrendering sovereignty to Washington, sparking accusations of treason against Zardari. However, the Pakistani army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, on Friday dismissed fears of a coup as speculation. Criticism of the government’s national security credentials rose on Monday in Pakistan’s fiercely media, which have frequently clashed with the government since Zardari became president in September 2008. An English-language daily newspaper, The News International, reported that the government had reduced funding to the nuclear weapons program since assuming office. Most budgeted money was being spent on salaries and the security of nuclear weapons, leaving little for further technical development, the newspaper reported. Pakistan has built a 10,000-man military force to guard its nuclear arsenal, partly in response to U.S. concerns that a nuclear warhead could be seized by al-Qaida or associated Pakistani militant groups. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, a leading global watchdog on arms proliferation, estimates Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal at some 100 warheads - about 20 more than India. The newspaper report said shortfalls in funding had led to a "technical rollback" of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program. The prime minister’s office denied that funding had been curtailed.

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

The reported rollback was an apparent reference to Pakistan’s decision not to respond publicly to unexpectedly rapid advances this year in India’s ballistic missile program. Significantly, they have included the successful test in November of India’s first "strategic" missile, the 3,500km-range Agni-IV. The rising political rhetoric over Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program coincided with the start on Monday of two days of confidence-building talks between India and Pakistan -- the first in four years _ aimed at reducing the risk of accidental war. The talks also coincided with India’s preparations for the test in February of Agni-V, a 3,400-mile-range missile dubbed the "China-killer" by Indian defense analysts. Pakistan has, to date, not tested any missile capable of travelling more than 1,300 miles -- the maximum distance to any Indian territory when various payloads are factored in, Pakistani strategic experts said. Pakistan was unlikely to respond to India’s forthcoming missile test, because its own program is technically more advanced than India’s, they said. Pakistan doesn’t consider it necessary to respond by retesting a proven capability, they said. Hussain is a McClatchy special correspondent. http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/12/26/2562275/pakistani-government-defends-nuclear.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Pak Tribune – Pakistan Pakistan, India Come Closer on Nuclear CBMs 28 December, 2011 Pakistan News Service ISLAMABAD: The Sixth Round of Expert Level Talks between India and Pakistan on Nuclear Confidence Building Measures (CBMs) concluded here on Tuesday with positive note from both sides, a joint statement said. The two-day talks between the two countries were held in a cordial environment and both the conventional and nuclear CBMs were discussed. "The talks were held in a cordial and constructive atmosphere," the joint statement issued at the conclusion of the talks said. Munwar Saeed Bhatti, Additional Secretary (UN&EC), Ministry of Foreign Affairs, led the Pakistan delegation while D.B. Venkatesh Varma, Joint Secretary (DISA), Ministry of External Affairs, represented India. "Both sides reviewed the implementation and strengthening of existing CBMs in the framework of Lahore MoU, and agreed to explore possibilities for mutually acceptable additional CBMs," the statement further said. The two sides agreed to recommend to their foreign secretaries to extend the validity of the "Agreement on Reducing the Risk from Accidents Relating to Nuclear Weapons" for another five years. The joint statement also clarified that both sides will report the progress in talks to their respective Foreign Secretaries. India and Pakistan resumed their dialogue process early this year after a gap of over two years in the wake of the 2008 Mumbai attacks that was blamed on Pakistan-based militant groups. This was the fifth round of expert-level talks on conventional CBMs and the sixth round of expert-level talks on nuclear CBMs. The talks are held days before Pakistan and India will exchange the lists of their nuclear installations and facilities on January 01 under "Agreement on the Prohibition of Attack Against Nuclear Installations and Facilities". This accord was signed on December 31, 1988, and both countries exchange the list every year on January 1.

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Pakistan and India resumed dialogue process in February this year that was stalled after the November 26, 2008, Mumbai attacks. http://paktribune.com/news/Pakistan-India-come-closer-on-nuclear-CBMs-246212.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Al Arabiya – U.A.E. U.N. Urges Libya to Sell Off Cache of ‘Yellowcake’ Uranium Thursday, 22 December 2011 By Reuters (UNITED NATIONS) U.N. experts are urging Libya to get rid of a large cache of “yellowcake” uranium because the warehouse where it is being kept is neither safe nor secure enough for long-term storage, the U.N. envoy to Libya said Thursday. Inspectors from the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) completed an inspection of the Tajura nuclear facility in Tripoli and a warehouse in Sabha that stores yellowcake, a concentrated uranium powder, on Dec. 9, U.N. special envoy to Libya Ian Martin told the Security Council. “In an initial debriefing the IAEA conveyed its overall conclusion that none of the previously reported nuclear materials in either facility had gone missing,” Martin told the 15-nation council via video-link from Tripoli. Former Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi had a clandestine nuclear weapons program, which he abandoned in December 2003. IAEA and U.S. experts verified at the time that the program was fully dismantled. While there appears to be no immediate health or radiation risk posed by the uranium, Martin said, the IAEA is encouraging Libya to sell and transfer the 6,400 barrels of yellowcake out of the country because the barrels are deteriorating and the site is not secure enough. “The present safety and security measures at the facility are not deemed sufficient longer-term,” Martin said. “There appears, however, to be no risk of proliferation given the weight and state of the barrels.” Yellowcake uranium, which is not highly radioactive, cannot be used for nuclear weapons unless processed and purified. Martin also confirmed a U.S. finding from last month that Libya’s missing stocks of shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles – “man portable air defense systems” or MANPADS - appear to be still in the country. “While the focus of international concern continues to be the potential proliferation of MANPADs, as yet there seems to be little evidence of such weapons systems appearing in neighboring countries,” he said. “Visits at weapon storage sites and brigades throughout Libya suggest that most looted arms may be held by revolutionary brigades or local militias within a limited distance from the looted sites, thereby rendering it primarily a national Libyan arms control and disarmament concern,” Martin said. He added that the U.N. Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL) had agreed with Libya's Defence Ministry to set up a task force on MANPADS to “facilitate a country-wide mapping of weapons and storage sites and to coordinate the identification, collection and disabling efforts.” The U.N. mission is also working to register MANPADS held by revolutionary brigades, Martin said. Separately, the United States is working with Libya's Defense Ministry to create an inventory and destroy superfluous conventional weapons around in Libya, he said. In the chaotic fighting to end Qaddafi’s rule, local militias trying to overthrow him raided arms depots and took the weapons for themselves.

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

The militias are largely loyal to the Western-backed government now in power, but there are questions over how securely they are storing the weapons. Security experts have said that MANPADS could be acquired by militants or smugglers and taken across Libya's porous southern borders into neighboring Algeria, Mali, Mauritania and Niger. Martin also said that the Netherlands-based Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) was making progress in accounting for chemical weapons and materials found at two previously undeclared sites in Libya. He said that Libya’s government submitted to the OPCW in late November a detailed declaration of the materials, which were transferred to the officially declared storage site. The OPCW plans to return in mid-January to work with the government on safe storage for the materials. http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2011/12/22/184055.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

RIA Novosti – Russian Information Agency Russia Successfully Test Fires Bulava Missiles 23 December 2011 Russia successfully test launched two Bulava intercontinental ballistic missiles on Friday, Defense Ministry spokesman Col. Igor Konashenkov said. The missiles were launched from the Borey-class Yury Dolgoruky nuclear-powered submarine in the White Sea and hit designated targets at the Kura test range on Kamchatka, some 6,000 kilometers to the east. This was the troubled Bulava’s 18th test launch. Only 11 launches have been officially declared successful. But some analysts suggest that in reality the number of failures is considerably larger. Russian military expert Pavel Felgengauer said that of the Bulava's first 12 test launches, only one was entirely successful. Despite several previous failures, officially blamed on manufacturing faults, the Russian military has insisted that there is no alternative to the Bulava. The Bulava (SS-NX-30) SLBM carries up to 10 MIRV warheads and has a range of over 8,000 kilometers (5,000 miles). The three-stage ballistic missile is designed for deployment on Borey-class nuclear submarines. MOSCOW, December 23 (RIA Novosti) http://en.ria.ru/mlitary_news/20111223/170450806.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

RIA Novosti –Russian Information Agency Russia Reports 25,000 Undersea Radioactive Waste Sites 26 December 2011 There are nearly 25,000 hazardous underwater objects containing solid radioactive waste in Russia, an emergencies ministry official said on Monday. The ministry has compiled a register of so-called sea hazards, including underwater objects in the Baltic, Barents, White, Kara, and Black Seas as well as the Sea of Okhotsk and the Sea of Japan, Oleg Kuznetsov, deputy head of special projects at the ministry’s rescue service, said.

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

These underwater objects include nuclear submarines that have sunk and ships with ammunition and oil products, chemicals and radioactive waste. Their condition has been closely monitored for the past 15 years by ministry specialists. The danger is that metal containers can eventually be eroded by sea water, resulting in the leak of hazardous substance. Hazardous sites with solid radioactive waste sit on the sea bed mainly at a depth of 500 meters, Kuznetsov said. Especially dangerous are reactor holds of nuclear submarines off the Novaya Zemlya Archipelago and a radio- isotope power units sunk near Sakhalin Island, he added. “Should a major threat to the environment and people arise then the state will take effective measures to eliminate it,” he said. MOSCOW, December 26 (RIA Novosti) http://en.ria.ru/Environment/20111226/170500108.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Atlanta Journal-Constitution Tuesday, December 27, 2011 Medvedev: Test of Much-Heralded New Missile Done The Associated Press (AP) MOSCOW — A ballistic missile that is to be a cornerstone of Russia's nuclear arsenal has completed its rocky test program and will be commissioned by the military, President Dmitry Medvedev announced Tuesday during a meeting with military officers. The Bulava ICBM, intended to arm a new generation of nuclear submarines, is a three-stage missile that can carry up to 10 individually targeted warheads at a range of 8,000 kilometers (5,000 miles). The Bulava suffered a string of failures during tests that dragged on for years, raising doubts about the future of the most expensive military project in the nation's post-Soviet history. Several recent tests, however, have been successful, including last week's simultaneous launch of two Bulavas. Russian officials have billed Bulava as a new-generation weapon, capable of dodging any potential missile defenses, thanks to its quick start and an ability to perform unusual maneuvers in flight. The Bulava would replace Soviet-built missiles approaching the end of their service lifetimes. The Russian navy also has finished building the first of a new series of nuclear-powered submarines to be armed with the new missile, the Yuri Dolgoruky. Several other such submarines are under construction. http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/medvedev-test-of-much-1275756.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

RIA Novosti – Russian Information Agency Russia Test Launches Stiletto Missile 27 December 2011 Russia successfully test launched an RS-18 (SS-19 Stiletto) intercontinental ballistic missile from the Baikonur Space Center in Kazakhstan on Tuesday, Defense Ministry spokesman Vadim Koval said.

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

“The goal of the test launch is to prove the stability and basic technical characteristics of missiles of this kind,” Koval said. The Russian Strategic Missile Forces are considering the possibility of extending the RS-18 missiles’ service term by one year to 33 years, he added. A source in Russia’s defense industry said RS-18 missiles are currently used to test advanced warheads designed to penetrate missile defenses. Developed by the Chelomei Design Bureau, the RS-18 is a silo-based, liquid-propellant missile, which together with the RS-16 (SS-17) and RS-20 (SS-18) comprises the fourth generation of Russian strategic missiles. The missile is capable of carrying up to six warheads. The first RS-18 missiles entered service in 1975, with its improved version being put into service five years later. In late November, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev ordered a series of steps intended to strengthen Russia’s missile defense capabilities in response to U.S.-European missile shield plans. Those plans include a possible deployment of Iskander tactical missiles near Russia’s Baltic Sea exclave of Kaliningrad “in the near future.” Russia is seeking written, legally binding guarantees that the U.S. missile shield will not be directed against it. Washington, however, has refused to provide those guarantees to Moscow and said it will not alter its missile defense plans despite increasingly tough rhetoric from Moscow. MOSCOW, December 27 (RIA Novosti) http://en.ria.ru/mlitary_news/20111227/170519962.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

The Moscow Times – Russia Optimism on Missile Defense Agreement Decreasing 27 December 2011 By Nikolaus von Twickel Moscow will develop and deploy new rockets to counter a U.S.-driven European missile shield as long as NATO frustrates Russia in talks to cooperate over missile defense, according to senior Defense Ministry officials. The optimism after last year’s Russia-NATO summit in Lisbon has been falling inexorably because the Western alliance is not heeding Moscow’s reservations, Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov told The Moscow Times. “They listen to us carefully and say they understand our concerns, but at the same time they continue to implement their plans for expanding their missile defense potential,” Antonov said in an e-mailed interview conducted last month. Antonov pointed out that the United States has stated that it will build a radar station in Turkey, missile interceptor bases in Romania and Poland, and deploy Aegis missile defense ships from a naval base in Spain. “We are not satisfied with these developments. Our partners are not prepared for the sort of cooperation offered by us — for a joint European missile defense,” he said. “They guarantee that the missile defense system will not be directed at Russia’s strategic nuclear forces, but only in words.” Alliance officials have said they would like to reach a missile defense deal with Moscow by NATO’s summit in Chicago next May, but the Kremlin has expressed growing antipathy to the project. President Dmitry Medvedev warned last month that it could upend the “reset” with Washington and lead to a new arms race. In a video address he threatened to drop out of the New START nuclear arms reduction pact and to direct the country’s own ballistic missiles against NATO’s shield.

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

The head of the Strategic Rocket Forces, Lieutenant General Sergei Karakayev, announced earlier this month that a planned new intercontinental ballistic missile generation would counter the Western missile shield. The new silo-based, 100-ton missiles “will be better equipped to overcome the U.S. missile shield,” Karakayev told RIA-Novosti. The yet unnamed liquid-fueled rockets should replace the country’s Soviet-era R36 missiles, codenamed “Satan” by NATO, the general said. Karakayev said his forces were busy introducing and upgrading other weapons like the Yars, Topol and Bulava missiles, in accordance with Medvedev’s announcement that Moscow would take steps to strengthen national security in light of U.S. actions to deploy the missile shield. NATO is adamant that Russia has nothing to fear from the missile shield because it is purely defensive. But Deputy Defense Minister Antonov explained that this does not dispel Moscow’s doubts. “The basic principle of defining security threats remains the same all along: If new arms are deployed in such a way that they reduce your defense capability, then that is bad. There is no point in further analyzing if these weapons are defensive or offensive,” he said. “You must take into account that missile defense radars and satellites have reconnaissance capabilities. These and other factors are negatives for Russia in the deployment of a European missile shield,” he said. Antonov pointed out that Washington had shown a similar stance when it argued strongly against Russian plans to sell “purely defensive” S-300 anti-aircraft missiles to Iran. Moscow canceled the deal in 2010, saying it would violate UN Security Council sanctions. Asked about U.S. scientists’ doubts that NATO’s missile shield would ever work as envisaged by Western officials, Antonov said the system’s effectiveness will only be known after it has been put in place and Moscow was obliged to assume it can work. “We have a duty to take the potential of U.S. anti-missile weapons into account, which, under certain conditions, could intercept our missiles,” he said. But the deputy minister also stressed that the door for further missile defense cooperation talks remains open. A career diplomat, Antonov joined the Defense Ministry last February after serving seven years as director of the Foreign Ministry’s security and disarmament department. http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/optimism-on-missile-defense-agreement- decreasing/450561.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

RIA Novosti – Russian Information Agency U.S. Preparing for Tactical Nuclear Cuts in Future Arms Deal with Russia 27 December 2011 The United States is preparing for talks that could lead to cuts in tactical nuclear weapons and warheads in storage in a future arms agreement with Russia, a senior arms control official said in an interview with RIA Novosti. “At the moment we are engaged in what I would say is a ‘homework period,’” said Rose Gottemoeller, Assistant Secretary of State for the bureau of arms control, verification and compliance. “We are preparing a way for new negotiations but we are not yet ready to embark on new negotiations.”

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

When President Barack Obama signed the new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) with Russia on April 8, 2010 he pledged to look forward to future nuclear arms negotiations and began planning for them, Gottemoeller said. Obama sought a deal on new categories of arms in future reduction negotiations, she said. “The first category would be further reductions in deployed nuclear warheads. These warheads are the easiest ones to see from outer space, from either Russian satellites or U.S. satellites. Up to this point in the history of arms control efforts we've always focused on deployed weapons,” she said. The U.S. also wanted a deal on other nuclear weapons. “One - non-deployed nuclear weapons, weapons that are in storage facilities or reserve, and the third category is non-strategic weapons or tactical nuclear weapons. Those last two categories are brand new and for that reason we have been very interested in working with the Russian Federation on some new approaches that will be necessary for verifying such agreements,” Gottemoeller said. The United States is also interested in some of the conceptual and definition questions that are involved, because “what we consider a tactical nuclear weapon may be different from what the Russian Federation considers to be a tactical nuclear weapon or non-strategic nuclear weapon,” she said. WASHINGTON, December 27 (RIA Novosti) http://en.ria.ru/mlitary_news/20111227/170513651.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

CRIENGLISH.com – China U.S. Missile Shield Deal with Romania Takes Effect December 23, 2011 Xinhua The bilateral agreement on the deployment of the U.S. ballistic missile defense system in Romania has taken effect on Friday, announced the Romanian Foreign Ministry in a press release on Friday. "Romania and the United States of America are pleased to announce together that the Agreement between Romania and the United States of America on setting up the U.S. ballistic missile defense system in Romania has taken effect on Dec. 23, 2011," said the statement. The U.S. system of defense missile interceptors will be placed at the Air Base at Deveselu in southern Romania, as a component of the Adaptive Phased Approach to the U.S. Defense System against the Ballistic Missiles in Europe by 2015. This base represents a significant contribution made by the two states to NATO efforts on missile defense, the release added. Romania and the United States signed the ballistic missile defense agreement in Washington, D.C. on Sep. 12, allowing the U.S. to construct, maintain and operate a facility encompassing the land-based SM-3 ballistic missile defense system at the Deveselu Air Base. The system will provide a defensive capability to protect Europe and the U.S. against ballistic missiles launched from the middle-east, the U.S. State Department said when inking the deal. http://english.cri.cn/6966/2011/12/23/189s673048.htm (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Global Security Newswire Pentagon’s Conventional Prompt-Strike Effort Takes 2012 Funding Hit December 23, 2011 By Elaine M. Grossman, Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON -- An annual U.S. defense appropriations bill for fiscal 2012 has cut $25 million from a program aimed at developing a conventional capability to attack faraway targets on short notice (see GSN, Aug. 18). Lawmakers said in a House-Senate conference report that new appropriations for non-nuclear “prompt global strike” systems would be reduced because of “program delays caused by two consecutive flight test failures of the Hypersonic Technology Vehicle 2.” “Prompt global strike” refers to a capability sought by the Defense Department in which targets halfway around the world could be attacked within 60 minutes of a launch command. The HTV-2 technology -- a leading component in the effort to build a prompt global strike capacity -- produced two test-flight disappointments, first in April 2010 and again this past August. For several years, it has appeared that the Air Force Conventional Strike Missile -- designed to feature a technology based on the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency’s HTV-2 experimental apparatus -- would be the first prompt global strike weapon system to be fielded. Whether that will continue to be the case is unclear. Initial estimates were that the Conventional Strike Missile could initially be deployed before the end of 2012, but repeated program delays have slowed its development (see GSN, Sept. 3, 2008). Industry officials earlier this year said an initial missile might be ready for fielding around 2020 (see GSN, June 24). When deployed, a Conventional Strike Missile would pair space boosters with a hypersonic "payload delivery vehicle" on the front end that dispenses a kinetic energy projectile. Upon nearing its target, the projectile would break up into dozens of lethal fragments. Top U.S. strategic commanders have repeatedly insisted that this type of fast-flying conventional capability is needed as an alternative to launching a nuclear weapon against an imminent missile threat or other time-urgent target in instances where no other strike assets are within range (see GSN, May 28, 2008). In total, the legislation offers $179.8 million for prompt global strike for this fiscal year, down from the Obama administration’s $204.8 million request. The conference report is part of an omnibus 2012 spending bill for several federal entities, including the Defense, Energy, Treasury, Homeland Security, Interior and Labor departments. The appropriations conferees noted that another technology under development for the prompt global strike mission, the Army’s Advanced Hypersonic Weapon, had recently completed a successful flight demonstration (see GSN, Nov. 18). Pentagon officials have said the AHW technology could contribute to their understanding of hypersonic flight but probably would not lead to a deployable weapon in the near future. Apparently seeking to build on the successful AHW test, the lawmakers directed that their $25 million reduction to defense-wide prompt global strike efforts “not be applied to the Advanced Hypersonic Weapon program.” A Pentagon spokeswoman said on Thursday, though, that the new funding reduction could affect a number of projects related to conventional prompt global strike, beyond simply reflecting schedule alterations that resulted from the two HTV-2 flight test mishaps. Fiscal 2012 “investments will exploit the DARPA and Army flight tests, as well as conduct and analyze ground tests, modeling and simulation, and systems engineering,” said the spokeswoman, who asked not to be named while substituting for a colleague who normally handles the issue area. “All are relevant to a range of *conventional prompt global strike] concepts.

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

“The $25 *million+ reduction will limit the scope of these activities, which are spread across the Hypersonic Glide, Alternate Re-entry System, and *Office of the Secretary of Defense+ Studies program codes,” the Pentagon representative said in an e-mailed response to written questions. The appropriations conference bill for fiscal 2012, which began Oct. 1, passed the House on Dec. 16 and the Senate the following day. It remains to be signed by President Obama. The legislation reflects a compromise between the earlier House-drafted version of the bill, which moved to reduce prompt global strike coffers by $100 million, and the Senate version, which fully funded the line item. House appropriators did not reveal in their legislation why they slashed the funds, but a committee staffer said at the time the reduction was one among many bill payers for what the panel considered "more important, higher priority programs.” In a prior action, legislation drafted by the House Armed Services Committee and passed in that chamber authorized a $25 million cut to prompt global strike, voicing concern that in the Air Force Conventional Strike Missile effort the Pentagon was “pursuing a weaponized missile system … before demonstrating that the technology is feasible" (see GSN, June 16). As always, the legislative process gave the House and Senate appropriations processes the final word on the spending matter. An “engineering review board,” or ERB, continues to study the August HTV-2 flight test in a bid to determine which functions succeeded or failed, and why, Pentagon officials said this week. The defense research agency said in August that the latest test for the hypersonic vehicle was terminated as the craft was ascending. An unspecified system “anomaly” prompted the vehicle to initiate a controlled descent and splash down into the Pacific Ocean, the agency said after the test. In response to questions, a DARPA spokesman, Eric Mazzacone, would not detail how the anomaly manifested itself. Agency officials were confident at the time, though, that the type of problems determined to have caused the April 2010 flight test failure were not responsible for the latest mishap. Engineers have cited a “higher than predicted yaw” -- the angle at which the vehicle flies -- as the culprit in causing the 2010 flight anomaly. That finding “prompted engineers to adjust the vehicle’s center of gravity, decrease the angle of attack flown and use the onboard reaction control systems to augment vehicle flaps during the vehicle’s second flight test,” the defense research agency said in August. “Those changes appear to have been effective.” “An initial assessment indicates,” the agency quoted HTV-2 program manager Maj. Chris Schulz as saying, “that the Flight 2 anomaly is unrelated to the Flight 1 anomaly.” Despite the serious glitches, both tests offered significant advancements in understanding hypersonic flight, DARPA officials said. “The second flight test, according to preliminary data, demonstrated stable aerodynamically controlled Mach 20 hypersonic flight for approximately three minutes,” Mazzacone told Global Security Newswire in August. The test event also demonstrated a key transition point in aerodynamics, according to the DARPA director. “We’ve been working for more than 50 years to identify how to predict when the transition from laminar to turbulent flow will occur,” said Regina Dugan, noting this would allow engineers “to assess when a vehicle is about to experience its highest drag and heat load.” Early data from the flight test “indicates that our preflight models successfully predicted transition to within 10 seconds of actual transition point,” she said in an Aug. 25 statement.

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Dugan said the new information, if confirmed through further analysis, could help determine “how far *HTV-2] can fly with more accuracy.” Additionally, the first flight test in 2010 “demonstrated advances in high lift-to-drag aerodynamics; high temperature materials; thermal protection systems; autonomous flight safety systems; and advanced guidance, navigation and control for long-duration hypersonic flight,” Mazzacone said. The DARPA spokesman declined to release the names, titles or affiliations of members of the HTV-2’s second flight test engineering review board -- or even say how many individuals comprise the panel. “DARPA, to protect the integrity of the review process, currently has no plans to release the names of those associated with the independent engineering review board,” Mazzacone said in August. The “review of the HTV-2 flight test 2 anomaly is still under way,” the Pentagon spokeswoman said this week. “The ERB has not concluded its analysis nor recommendations.” http://www.nti.org/gsn/article/pentagons-conventional-prompt-strike-effort-takes-2012-funding-hit/ (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Breitbart News US Reports Progress on Bioweapons Control Agence France-Presse (AFP) December 23, 2011 Progress has been made in protecting against the threat of biological weapons, the State Department said Friday at the end of global talks which agreed to boost moves to thwart their spread. "We will continue to face new and emerging biological threats that will require the coordinated and connected efforts of a broad range of domestic and international partners," the department said in a statement. "As we take action to counter these threats, we will work together to advance our own health security and provide for the improved condition of all humanity." The 165 signatories to the biological and toxin weapons convention agreed to "a multinational work program for the next five years that promises to revitalize global efforts to reduce biological threats." The convention, which came into force in 1975, bans the development, manufacture or stockpiling of biological weapons. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who opened the conference in Geneva on December 7, had sought to rally international efforts against the threat of a biological attack, saying the warning signs were "too serious to ignore." She told the three-week conference that the risk of a bio-weapons attack was "both a serious national security challenge and a foreign policy priority." Clinton urged more transparency from member states to boost confidence that signatories were living up to their obligations under the 1975 treaty, which could be achieved through a review of the annual reporting system. The conference agreed to review the treaty's annual reporting system and over the next five years will build ways of dealing with disease outbreaks as well as setting up a database to transfer information and calls for help. http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.a0d04643019911f34610f3ddf956307e.401&show_article=1 (Return to Articles and Documents List)

The Atlantic

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

How China Thinks About the Future of Cyberspace Conflict Chinese analysts are writing about how their country should approach what one author calls "cyber war mobilization" By Adam Segal December 28 2011 Chinese analysts and officials like to point out that it was the United States that first set up Cyber Command and thus, in their view, militarized cyberspace. Yet Chinese military thinkers are clearly thinking about what type of organizations and institutions they will need to conduct offensive cyber operations and to defend their own networks against attacks. An interesting piece in China Defense Daily lays out some of the characteristics necessary for "a highly effective command system for cyber war mobilization." • Military and civilian networks are interconnected, and the resources needed for cyber war permeate society; military units, social organizations, and even individuals "will all possibly become combat forces during a cyber war." • Given this diffusion of resources, there is a need for a cyber war mobilization command system with a "vertical command hierarchy" that reaches into all of society. • Each of the branches of the military should have its own command division, manage necessary resources, cultivate forces, and organize training and drills. Once a war breaks out, there needs to be a "coordinated strategic level" command structure that mobilizes resources and launches combat operations. • There must be specialized troops within industrial sectors, with especially strong ties to the information industries. • Need to enlarge specialized cyber troops, recruiting computer network experts. The PLA should also reach out to all segments of society and create cyber reserves and people's militias. • Offense and defense in cyber war have distinct characteristics, and they change frequently. Offensive technologies include computer viruses, EMP bombs, microwave bombs, and computer and microchip backdoors. For defense, there are network scanners, network wiretapping devices, password breaking devices, electromagnetic detectors and firewalls, and anti-virus software. • Because the technological requirements of these weapons are very high, there must be extensive R&D programs into new offensive weapons as well as the defensive and offensive capabilities of the potential adversary. This is a very "whole of society" approach, one which seems to fundamentally grasp that power in cyberspace is multi-faceted and spread throughout society. And while we assume that Chinese policymakers can simply mobilize these social forces to bolster state power, is that actually the case? And if it is true now, might that change? These types of articles (and perhaps blog posts like this one?) can be expected to feed into the growing security dilemma between the United States and China. Chinese analysts see Cyber Command and Cyber Storm exercises as directed against them. Though the tone of the article is exploratory--and the author, Huang Chunping, appears to be an aerospace and nuclear expert, not a cyber specialist--the take-home for many readers will be that all Chinese citizens are potential cyber warriors. Dampening a security dilemma is not easy. Dialogue and confidence- building measures can help, but these are only at the preliminary stages right now. Hopefully they will pick up in 2012, otherwise the lack of trust between Washington and Beijing looks only to grow. This article originally appeared at CFR.org, an Atlantic partner site. http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/12/how-china-thinks-about-the-future-of-cyberspace- conflict/250589/ (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

RIA Novosti – Russian Information Agency OPINION/Analysis Iran’s Views of Its Nuclear Issue 23 December 2011 By Vladimir Yevseyev* for RIA Novosti, Tehran-Moscow Iran has issued an invitation to IAEA inspectors to visit the country, the first such move since the agency published its report on the status of Iran's nuclear program in November. It is difficult to say what will happen next, especially since the international community is split into two opposing camps on this issue. This article will analyze both of them, also taking into account the situation in Tehran. Harsh demands The West and Israel believe that the Iranian leadership long ago set itself the goal of building nuclear weapons, and so are calling for harsh, crippling sanctions, including an embargo on Iranian oil exports (Iran’s natural gas production is limited) and bank transactions (primarily by its Central Bank), while refusing to take off the table a potential strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities if it continues with its nuclear weapons program. That scenario might be left to Israel to implement, sparking a regional war with unpredictable consequences. There is by no means consensus on harsh sanctions against Iran. For example, India, Japan and South Korea need to buy Iranian oil, and Greece does not support the idea of sanctions either, preventing their approval in the EU. The worst element is Israel’s readiness to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities, action that even Washington does not support. Interaction and dialogue Advocates of the other view, in particular Russia, maintain that Iran’s authorities have not yet fully settled on a course of building nuclear weapons. However, they are worried by Iran’s efforts to create a complete closed nuclear fuel cycle, including uranium enrichment and the extraction of plutonium from nuclear fuel waste. But a closed nuclear fuel project does not seem economically viable because Iran only has one nuclear reactor, at Bushehr, which Russia is willing to supply with nuclear fuel for as long as it is operational. The other nuclear facilities, such as a 360 MW light-water reactor at Darkhovin, in the southeastern province of Khuzestan, are more for show than actual delivery. Furthermore, research reactors do not need large amounts of fuel. For example, the Tehran Nuclear Research Center’s research reactor, which has a nominal capacity of 5 MW, has spent only 100 kg of low-enriched nuclear fuel (less than 20% of Uranium 235) in the past 20 years. However, a closed nuclear fuel cycle carries a certain risk in that it provides the research and technological prerequisites for creating uranium- or plutonium-based nuclear weapons. If the international community sits on its hands, gaining nuclear-power status will become a purely political matter for Iran. North Korea proved that this is a very real possibility: it withdrew from the Non-Proliferation Treaty and subsequently held nuclear tests in October 2006 and May 2009. Most Russian experts advocate continued interaction between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), arguing that this could keep Iran’s nuclear program peaceful. Tehran obviously shares this view, which is why it has admitted IAEA inspectors to its nuclear facilities. However, the level of technical cooperation between the IAEA and Iran has been falling, as the termination of most of their 55 joint projects indicates. Tehran’s view of the issue

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Iran views its nuclear program as a source of national pride, seeing its continuation as imperative and as a pathway to pushing technological development forward. This is why attempts by the United States and its allies to limit the development of Tehran’s uranium or plutonium programs are branded hostile in Tehran. The country’s ruling conservative and neo-conservative forces (the opposition has barely 15% of the vote in Iran), which are preparing for parliamentary elections in March 15, 2012, cannot accept a compromise for fear of being accused of treason. This situation is unlikely to change until the presidential elections in 2013. Few in the West know that the numerous sanctions against Iran that are currently in place have had no effect whatsoever on large Iranian companies, which evade them with ease, thanks to state assistance. Instead, the blow has hit small and midsized exporters that have no connection to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard or the country’s nuclear or missile programs, as well as ordinary people, who blame their worsening economic condition on the United States and its closest allies – Britain and Israel. One of the consequences of this is that the opposition is increasingly losing influence. Military solution Iranians take a particular view of the idea of a military solution to the nuclear issue. They believe it is unlikely because of their country’s sizable military potential and close ties with Hezbollah, Наmas and Islamic Jihad. At the same time, they disregard the fact that Iran’s main ally in the Middle East, Syria, has weakened and that many Hamas members have fled, or that Saudi Arabia and Qatar’s influence over the Palestinians is on the rise. Furthermore, Egypt’s military authorities have all but refused to restore diplomatic relations with Iran, and there are many other elements constraining the Iranian authorities’ regional ambitions. Achievements in the development of Iran’s armed forces, in particular in missile construction, have led the country to overestimate its combat capability. In fact, its military forces are not even ready for a military confrontation with Israel, which is technologically superior to Iran, and so it would be unreasonable for Iran to willingly aggravate problems in relations with Israel or worse still, with the United States. On the other hand, the Iranians are not put off by the possibility of hostilities. Since most of them are Shias who have for centuries lived surrounded by enemies, they are prepared for any turn of events. They will not be cowed, and it is very difficult to buy them, which means that the international community should seek a compromise. This will prove elusive, but it is the only way to resolve Iran’s nuclear issue. Vladimir Yevseyev is director of the Center for Social and Political Research. The views expressed in this article are the author's and may not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti. http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20111223/170441642.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Dong-A Ilbo – South Korea OPINION/Editorial Change in NK Policy Needed December 26, 2011 North Korea has illustrated that it will continue its “military first” policy, which comprises its nuclear armament and aggression against South Korea. The Rodong Sinmun, the official newspaper of the North’s ruling Workers’ Party, said Saturday, “We will complete the grand task of the ‘military first’ revolution by honorably calling Compatriot Kim Jong Un our supreme commander and military general.” This came a week after the death of Kim Jong Il. This suggests that the junior Kim, who assumed the vice chairmanship of the party`s Central Military Committee upon receiving the rank of full general last year, will likely assume the post of supreme commander

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530 soon. Kim Jong Il also started ruling North Korea as supreme commander in 1994 following the death of his father and country`s founder Kim Il Sung. Jang Song Taek, Kim Jong Il’s brother-in-law and key patron, was seen wearing a military uniform with a full general`s badge for the first time Saturday while accompanying successor Kim Jong Un to pay respects to the late Kim Jong Il. Kim Kyong Hui, Jang’s wife and Kim Jong Il’s younger sister, became a full general last year. Therefore, the powerful military couple, who are aunt and uncle to the new ruler, appears to be protecting the 29-year-old supreme commander. The trio have never served in the military but were hurriedly granted full general titles for North Korea to implement its military-first policy. Kim Jong Il conducted military aggression against South Korea and sought to strengthen his military through the development of nuclear weapons and missiles by banking on the policy. If Kim Jong Un inherits this policy from his late father, a change in Pyongyang cannot be expected. Even though Kim Jong Un is poised to succeed his father as ruler based on the military-first policy, the South Korean government seems to be highly negligent and indifferent, causing fears among the people. The government issued a statement Tuesday, “We hope that North Korea regains stability soon so that South and North Korea can cooperate to assure peace and prosperity on the Korean Peninsula.” In his meeting with the leaders of the ruling and main opposition parties Thursday, President Lee Myung-bak said, “These measures were taken to demonstrate that South Korea doesn`t perceive North Korea as the enemy,” adding, “If North Korean society stabilizes, we can handle inter-Korean relations flexibly as necessary.” Why is Seoul so impatient? If the South only emphasizes flexibility though it can hardly predict if and how the North will change, Seoul could end up trapping itself. This could be interpreted in South Korea and abroad that President Lee, fatigued by lasting tension amid Seoul’s pledge to stick to its principles, is effectively surrendering to Pyongyang despite no signs that the North’s attacks on the South Korean naval corvette Cheonan and Yeonpyeong Island will be handled anytime soon. South Korea has also not given its people confidence that it can accurate assess the situation in North Korea. Though the government had remained uninformed of Kim Jong Il’s death for 51 hours and 30 minutes, President Lee said, “South Korea’s intelligence capacity is not too weak to cause concern,” in displaying a flexible stance. He seemed to be trying to protect the chief of the National Intelligence Service when he said, “Our government learned of Kim’s death through Pyongyang’s announcement, but all other countries were unaware of the news either.” Sudden changes in the North are an extremely imperative matter to the South. As chief executive, President Lee should not be saying it was okay not to be aware just because other nations were not, either, and trying to self-justify the intelligence failure. Through the Committee for Peaceful Unification of the Fatherland, North Korea said Sunday, “Whoever attempts to block any South Korean people from all walks of life from visiting our country to pay their respects (to Kim Jong Il), we will define them as criminals guilty of grave crimes and who defame our supreme dignity and never forgive them.” Pyongyang obviously remains unchanged, and Seoul cannot afford to negligently ease its sense of alertness. http://english.donga.com/srv/service.php3?bicode=080000&biid=2011122663968 (Return to Articles and Documents List)

International Herald Tribune/New York Times OPINION/Op-Ed Contributor A Pandora's Box in the Middle East By BENNETT RAMBERG December 27, 2011 “Anyone who is thinking of attacking Iran should be prepared for powerful blows and iron fists.” So declared Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, on Nov. 10, speaking in response to reports that Israel may strike Iran’s

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530 nuclear plants. But the risk of tit-for-tat attacks raises a specter few seem to recognize: the first radiological war in history. General Masoud Jazayeri, deputy commander of Iran’s armed forces, indicated what “blows” and “fists” could mean when he warned last month that Dimona — the center of Israel’s never-acknowledged nuclear arms program — was “the most accessible target.” The significance of the threat goes beyond the risk to Israel’s nuclear weapons program. An attack on the Dimona complex could release the facility’s radioactive contents, posing major long-term contamination risks to the reactor site and beyond. But in a region where the principle of “an eye for an eye” has long held sway Tehran’s advantage stops there. As the country now housing the Middle East’s largest nuclear power plant at Bushehr, Iran has become the holder of the region’s largest radiological hostage. Does this present an Israeli checkmate? In this volatile part of the world, maybe, but don’t count on it. Potential and active combatants have historically been reluctant to target operating nuclear reactors. The United States, for example, refrained from attacking North Korea’s Yongbyon plant to halt Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons program, in part over radiological concerns. Israel took off the gloves and bombed Iraq’s Osirak reactor in 1981 and Syria’s Al Kibar plant in 2007 before they went into operation, betting that neither country would strike Dimona in retaliation. The bet paid off. Iraq did not have the capacity to strike back and Syria feared the consequences of doing so. Only in 1991, during the first Gulf war, did we see the first attack on an operational plant, when the United States bombed a small research reactor outside Baghdad. But Iraq had removed nuclear material from the plant before the war started, then tried its own hand at targeting reactors when it launched Scuds at Dimona. The missiles missed their targets. Iran’s recent threat against Dimona may be mere puffing, but its ballistic missile capacity makes tit for tat strikes plausible, and General Jazayeri’s statement marks only one of many threats. Fortunately, Dimona is no Chernobyl or Fukushima. It has a relatively small reactor, and because it is used for weapons, operators replace fuel more often, reducing radioactive inventory, and Israel may not operate the plant continually. On the flip side, after decades of service, adjacent facilities — some underground — hold spent fuel, plutonium and atomic waste that could add significantly to the consequences of an accurate ballistic missile strike from Iran. Radiological effects would depend on the volume and nature of nuclear isotopes released, seasonal winds and protective measures. Computer models suggest that well beyond the zone immediately in and around the reactor and nearby communities, even the plant’s relatively small inventory of radioactive material could lead to a vast increase in cancers, birth defects and other related illnesses. There would also be many troubling socioeconomic consequences. Public officials would have to restrict the consumption of foodstuffs from even modestly contaminated zones, and require the evacuation of commercial, industrial and residential districts in radioactive hot spots. The nuclear accidents in Ukraine and Japan suggest a huge increase in stress-related illnesses. Addressing such matters would add to the billions of dollars governments would have to spend on nuclear cleanup. Bushehr, unlike Dimona, is a very large nuclear power reactor. Located in the northern reaches of the Gulf, the plant only began partial operation in September. It will go to full power early next year, building up an inventory of dangerous elements in the operating fuel as a natural part of the process. Were a military attack to strike the plant at full power after months of operation, the release of radioactivity could be greater than at Chernobyl. Prevailing north, northwest winds would carry radioactive debris along the Gulf across sparsely populated regions. Given the size of the Bushehr plant, the lessons of Chernobyl and Fukushima

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530 tell us that Iran’s cleanup burden, energy loss and medical and population-relocation costs could approach hundreds of billions of dollars over decades. Despite these grim scenarios, both Israel and Iran can attenuate risks beyond the imperfect air and missile defenses now in place. This includes plant shutdowns in times of crisis and the removal of radioactive elements to more secure locations, as Iraq did in 1991. Israel could close Dimona permanently given the plant’s age and mission fulfillment — the old reactor has generated all the weapons plutonium the country requires. Closure would symbolically help to reduce nuclear tensions in the region as well. Given the dangers, Israel and Iran would do well to ask if opening a radiological Pandora’s box serves either’s interest. Bennett Ramberg served as a policy analyst in the State Department’s Bureau of Politico-Military Affairs under President George H.W. Bush. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/27/opinion/a-pandoras-box-in-the-middle-east.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

MSNBC.com OPINION/Vitals December 27, 2011 Should Scientists Create Deadly Viruses? Yes, Says Bioethicist By Art Caplan, Ph.D. One of the predictable consequences of science’s rapidly growing knowledge of genetics is that the knowledge can be put to use to kill, harm or terrorize. Controlling dangerous knowledge is not easy and rarely foolproof—just look at the history of successful spying to get the secrets to make nuclear weapons or crack secret codes. The ability to make a new nasty class of biological weapons that could be used against us raises two important questions — should scientists try to make dangerous microbes and, if they do, who should they tell about their work? Recently, scientists working for the U.S. government made a deadly flu virus, H5N1, even more contagious by making it airborne. In its natural form, H5N1 kills more than half the people it infects, but almost never spreads from person to person. The new modified strain changes that. Last week, there was a kerfuffle when government advisers asked the details be kept secret and not published in scientific journals to keep the information from falling into the wrong hands. The scientists who tweaked the H5N1 virus say their work was necessary because they had to see if it was possible for the virus to mutate – and if it was, so that countries could take more dramatic steps to eradicate it, reported the New York Times. But others say it should never have been created in the first place, it’s too dangerous and could get out of the lab and into the population. So should scientists even be studying or making nasty microbial critters? The answer is yes. The only way to anticipate and respond to changes in nature that convert a relatively harmless strain of flu to a pandemic killer or to figure out ways to deal with horrors like flesh eating bacteria is to create and study them. The second question becomes the key one—who should have access to this knowledge? We need to do all we can to keep dangerous information out of the hands of both the bad and the irresponsible guys. This means not publishing the full formula for lethal microbes. It also means keeping an eye on where biological samples are shipped, who is invited to study at key laboratories and teaching ethical responsibility over

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530 and over again to budding scientists. It also means issuing government guidelines that journals, publishers, website managers and meeting organizers can follow to restrict what is made public that is obviously dangerous Some will sneer and say censorship has absolutely no place in science. But given the ways in which patents and trade secrets shape who has access to findings and data, that view is simply naïve. Others will say once the government starts dictating who can know what, the slope gets very slippery. But, the government should not make the rules — scientists, in consultation with other experts, should. Some say no restrictions will work—information always gets out in the end. But we don't have to make the end easy to reach. The dangerous uses of genetic knowledge should be kept as restricted as we can make them. Art Caplan, Ph.D., is the director for the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania. http://vitals.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/12/27/9748055-should-scientists-create-deadly-viruses-yes-says- bioethicist (Return to Articles and Documents List)

RIA Novosti – Russian Information Agency OPINION/Commentary START May Be Sunk By a Nuclear Torpedo 28 December 2011 By RIA Novosti military analyst Konstantin Bogdanov Washington has once again signaled its desire to negotiate reductions in Russia’s tactical nuclear arsenal. According to U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Rose Gottemoeller, the United States wants Russia to reenter the tangled web of interdependence spun around the issues of strategic and tactical nuclear weapons and antimissile defense. There will be no further progress on nuclear disarmament unless the countries can cut this Gordian knot. “The president *Barak Obama+ made it clear the day he signed the [START] treaty on April 8, 2010, that we would be ready to turn next to further reductions in strategic and non-strategic (or tactical) nuclear weapons, as well as deployed and non-deployed nuclear weapons,” Ms. Gottemoeller said. “Those two categories – non-strategic nuclear weapons and non-deployed nuclear weapons – are categories we’ve never tried to wrestle with in arms reduction negotiations…” Non-deployed nuclear weapons are a delicate matter, though more or less clear: the idea is to regulate and categorize the existing storage sites. This means determining which stored warheads (or their components) can still be regarded as a non-deployed munition capable of breakout potential. Though there is room for interpretation, the methodology is generally clear. By contrast, tactical nuclear weapons (TNW) are likely to become an intractable problem in bilateral relations. Why does this class of weapons (nuclear warheads of cruise and tactical ballistic missiles, nuclear torpedoes, nuclear depth bombs and mines, “specially designed” artillery shells and other short-range nuclear weapons) pose so many difficulties? Key element of containment Until recently Moscow rejected out of hand any U.S. signals to negotiate an agreement on binding bilateral TNW reductions. Given the mounting disagreements over America’s missile defense system in Europe, Russia is unlikely to relax its stance with regard to TNW. But why does Moscow refuse to budge on its tactical nuclear arsenal? Oddly, the answer lies in the Russian Federation’s Military Doctrine from 1999, which authorizes Russia to use nuclear weapons first “in the event of aggression against the Russian Federation using conventional arms, if the aggression threatens the very existence of the state.”

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

The Russian military and expert community makes no bones about this policy. Given the overall superiority of China and the NATO countries in conventional warfare, TNW are the key element of military-political containment. Simply put, there is no need to stop enemy tanks: none will enter Russia as long as it is able to decimate the forces of potential aggressors using nuclear-tipped Iskander or cruise missiles. A bit coarse, but very practical. Verification problems Even if you put aside Russia’s nuclear doctrine and geopolitical considerations, that is not the end of the problems – in fact, it is just the beginning. Registering and monitoring TNW is much more difficult than for strategic and offensive arms. First, TNW are mostly non-deployed. Strategic nuclear missiles are kept on permanent alert status, whereas nuclear torpedoes, cruise missiles, bombs and warheads for tactical ballistic missiles remain at storage sites until a threat emerges. Verifying and registering missile silos (or mobile launchers, or missile submarines) is much simpler than regulating storage sites. Should there be a limit to TNW storage sites in accordance with some definitive list? Should a ban be imposed on moving TNW to other bases, including non-specialized facilities (and you cannot do otherwise with tactical weapons)? What is to be done about planned transfers of TNW to units for exercises? Second, practically all TNW elements are dual-purpose. With some minor exceptions, all these munitions can be use as both conventional and nuclear weapons. The carriers (aircraft, submarines, artillery guns, and missile launchers) can be both conventional and nuclear-capable. How can you verify TNW non-deployment if there is no coherent method for distinguishing between a nuclear and a conventional bomber? Not to mention the speed with which one type can be converted to another (all you need is the “special munition” itself and a skilled crew). So, in principle, a TNW could turn up anywhere. You are likely to find a nuclear torpedo at an ordinary naval base’s maintenance area. A nuclear cruise missile may find its way to any air base where carrier aircraft are deployed. Nuclear shells or warheads for Iskanders or Tochkas can be found anywhere the land forces want them. Nuclear Augean stables If the negotiation partners want to create a workable verification regime for TNW, they will have to allow unannounced inspections of every slightly important military facility, as well as ships and submarines. Clearly, neither Washington nor Moscow will go along with that. If they reach the stage of formulating rules for TNW registration, they will face the difficult task of confirming baseline numbers. The problem is that no one other than authorized organizations in Russia and the United States knows even approximately how many TNW units there are in either country. This information is classified, and estimates made by independent experts have an enormous margin of error. As a result, there are numerous gaps and ambiguities. For example, the Americans have a term, “readied for disposition,” that applies to several thousand nuclear weapons in storage. What does this actually mean? Is there any hint of a breakout potential or are they just storing mothballed weapons that are ready for future use? These and other questions will have to be answered by participants in hypothetical negotiations on TNW reductions. There are numerous other problems of this kind, including how to register elements of dismantled nuclear weapons. For example, many thousand plutonium rods and thermonuclear-pumped components of dismantled tactical nuclear weapons are stored at Oak Ridge, in the United States. Russia has a similar storage facility called Mayak. More tangles

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Russia’s TNW arsenal makes the U.S. Congress very nervous. After the signing of the New START treaty, senators warned President Obama that Russia’s tactical arsenal was the key to further progress on strategic arms reductions. As for Russia, it flatly refused to discuss its tactical arsenal, let alone to link START talks to TNW, even at the height of its “reset” honeymoon with America. For the sake of politeness, experts formulated possible tradeoffs, like information exchanges on the real number of tactical munitions or defensive nuclear arms reductions (special anti-air missile warheads). However, the European missile defense system overshadowed any progress, and it became clear that even preliminary consultations on TNW were a long way off. Both world powers were taking paths that led them away from talks. The U.S. administration is very meticulous in its approach to tactical arsenals. First, they understand that merely raising the need to verify and register TNW may open Pandora’s box. Second, they heed the position of Congress, which generally reflects the existing state of affairs: strategic arsenals have been reduced to a point where TNW start playing an important role and emerge as a powerful bargaining chip. But Russia has not budged an inch on TNW even during the warmest period of the timid trans-Atlantic love affair across the Atlantic. Moscow sees TNW as non-negotiable. It’s unlikely that Russia’s stance has changed. Perhaps this is why Ms. Gottemoeller opted for caution. Washington more or less knows how Russia will respond to a proposal to discuss TNW reductions. The views expressed in this article are the author’s and may not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti. http://en.ria.ru/analysis/20111228/170530602.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

RT News (Russia Today) – Russia OPINION/Analysis ‘China More at Risk from US AMD Plans in Pacific’ 28 December 2011 By Robert Bridge, RT Speaking on the presence of US missile defense systems in the Pacific region, Maj. Gen. (Ret.) Vladimir Dvorkin says this shield is more of a threat to the nuclear forces in China than it is to Russia’s. Major Gen. Dvorkin, a senior fellow at the Russian Academy of Sciences' Institute of World Economy and International Relations, revealed that Japan and South Korea are already equipped with the Aegis missile defense systems. "A Pacific missile defense system is a matter of not a very distant future,” Dvorkin said at a conference in Moscow. “Japan already possesses four and South Korea two destroyers equipped with Aegis systems. The Japanese are planning to increase this number to six.” Japan has already intercepted ballistic targets with support from the US, he added. Given the location of these particular missile defense assets, they pose more of a threat to China’s nuclear forces than Russia’s. "This is a working missile defense system. And surely it threatens China's nuclear deterrence potential more than Russia's," Dvorkin said. In light of such findings, the retired major general said China, a growing military power in its own right, must also be involved in the ongoing negotiations on US missile defense in Europe and Asia.

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

"We cannot view this system only within the framework of negotiations between Russia, the US, and NATO," Dvorkin said. "Because China is a crucial factor affecting the UN Security Council positions," he added. Meanwhile, Alexey Arbatov, head of the International Security Center at the same institute, suggested that Russia should change the format of the negotiations on the US missile defense facilities in Europe. "Negotiations on the European missile defense should be resumed and their format should be changed,” he said. “It is necessary to talk about compatibility of the Russian aerospace defense system and the NATO program rather than about Russia's participation in the US’s or NATO's missile defense system." Arbatov then suggested that the Americans may also want guarantees that Russia’s defense system is not aimed at their territory. "Moscow demands that Washington provide legal guarantees that the European missile defense system is not targeted against Russia,” he noted. “Then we should think what Russia could offer to the Americans to guarantee that the Russian aerospace defense system is not targeted against the US.” In fact, these systems pursue the same goals, he added. The negotiations on the US missile defense system in Eastern Europe should be held simultaneously with negotiations on a new treaty on slashing strategic offensive arms, high-precision weapons and conventional weapons, Arbatov said. "I think that if the format is changed this way, a lot of issues will be viewed as pragmatic solutions rather than political propaganda," Arbatov concluded. http://rt.com/politics/russia-china-us-missile-defense-pacific-803/ (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Issue No. 967, 28 December 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530