Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 Articles & Other Documents: Featured Article: Pentagon Gets Cyberwar Guidelines

1. Amano Invited to Visit Iran’s Nuclear Sites 2. Saudi Arabia May Use Economic Clout to Squeeze Iran: Prince 3. Ahmadinejad Insists Iran Not Seeking Nuclear Bomb 4. Concrete Result Needed for Any Iran Visit: IAEA Chief 5. N. Korea could Test-Launch Missile at New Launch Site this Year: Expert 6. Spy Chief Says Policy Failures Dealt Blow to N. Korea's Heir Apparent 7. China Says No Cyber Warfare with U.S. 8. N.K. May Have Grid-Disabling Nuke 9. 'Proliferation Could Lead to Pyongyang’s Demise' 10. Obama Extends National Emergency Against N. Korea 11. India will get Russian N-Sub by December 12. Progressive Steps Needed to De-legitimise N-Weapons: PM 13. Pakistan’s Nuclear Arsenal Not at Risk, Says Blake 14. Nuclear Experts Killed in Russia Plane Crash Helped Design Iran Facility 15. Chavez's Odd Silence Raises Questions 16. Pentagon Gets Cyberwar Guidelines 17. Senate Bill Echoes House Questions about Obama's Nuclear Strategy 18. No Early-Intercept Defense 19. AFGSC to Renew Conventional Capabilities 20. Nuclear Terrorism Can Cause another Fukushima: Expert 21. S. Korea Does Not Need Nuclear Weapons ― Yet 22. Mind Your Own Nukes Please! 23. All Signs Say Iran Is Racing toward a Nuclear Bomb

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. 918, 24 June 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

Tehran Times – Iran Wednesday, June 22, 2011 Amano Invited to Visit Iran’s Nuclear Sites Tehran Times Political Desk TEHRAN - Atomic Energy Organization of Iran Director Fereydoun Abbasi Davani has said that he has invited IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano to visit Iran’ nuclear facilities. Abbasi Davani made the announcement after a meeting with Amano in Vienna on Tuesday on the sidelines of a five-day Ministerial Conference on Nuclear Safety, which opened on June 20. Abbasi Davani said that he invited Amano “and his colleagues to come to visit anywhere they like in all our nuclear installations,” Reuters reported. He also said that he had held “very good” and “transparent” talks with Amano. According to Reuters, Iran’s nuclear chief said that the two sides pledged to resolve problems through more dialogue in future but did not give any details on what was discussed. “We don’t have a difference of view,” he stated. On January 15 and January 16, 2011, diplomats from Egypt, Cuba, Syria, Algeria, Venezuela, Oman, and the Arab League visited the Natanz enrichment facility and the Arak heavy water reactor in response to Iran’s invitation. Some members of the UN Security Council and the European Union had also been invited but decided not to send representatives. The main bone of contention between Tehran and the West is Iran’s uranium enrichment program. Iran says all its nuclear activities are totally peaceful, and, as an IAEA member and an NPT signatory, it has the legal right to produce nuclear fuel for its research reactors and nuclear power plants. http://www.tehrantimes.com/Index_view.asp?code=242864 (Return to Articles and Documents List)

International Business Times Saudi Arabia May Use Economic Clout to Squeeze Iran: Prince June 22, 2011 Saudi Arabia may be forced to use its oil policy and enormous economic clout as a way to foil Iran’s nuclear power program and regional ambitions, according to a report in The Wall Street Journal. Saudi Prince Turki al-Faisal reportedly told a private group of British and American servicemen at an airbase in England that "Iran is very vulnerable in the oil sector, and it is there that more could be done to squeeze the current government," Turki, a former Saudi ambassador to the U.S. and U.K. as well as the former chief of Saudi intelligence, currently holds no official position in Riyadh. Saudi Arabia is greatly concerned by Iran on many levels. Tehran, a Shia Muslim power, is seeking to expand its influence in the Mid-East, putting it face to face against the Saudis, who are ruled by a Sunny Muslim elite. For example, the Iranians have repeatedly condemned the Sunni rulers of Bahrain who have cracked down brutally on protesters (most of whom are part of that nation’s Shia majority); while the Saudis have steadfastly supported and aided the Bahrain royal family.

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

According to WSJ, Turki also told that assembly that Tehran’s "meddling and destabilizing efforts in countries with Shiite majorities, such as Iraq and Bahrain, as well as those countries with significant Shiite communities…must come to an end. Saudi Arabia will oppose any and all of Iran's actions in other countries because it is Saudi Arabia's position that Iran has no right to meddle in other nations' internal affairs." The Saudis believe that Iran is supporting the anti-government movements in both Bahrain and Yemen (two of Saudi Arabia’s next door neighbors). The Saudis are also worried about Iranian support of the Hezbollah in Lebanon – Hezbollah is on the verge of taking a majority position in Beirut’s cabinet. Even within OPEC, the Saudis have urged other members to raise output in order to lower global oil prices, while Iran has strongly resisted this decision. Turki reportedly said that the Saudis can easily compensate for lower reduction in oil production by Iran, adding that Tehran’s economy and finances would be paralyzed by falling oil exports. "To put this into perspective, Saudi Arabia has so much [spare] production capacity -- nearly 4 million barrels [per] day -- that we could almost instantly replace all of Iran's oil production," the prince said. Perhaps of greater concern to Riyadh is Iran’s incipient nuclear program (which Tehran claims is being developed only for peaceful purposes). Turki said: "It is in our interest that Iran does not develop a nuclear weapon, for their doing so would compel Saudi Arabia, whose foreign relations are now so fully measured and well assessed, to pursue policies that could lead to untold and possibly dramatic consequences.” The Saudi will also seek to challenge Iranian influence in Iraq (a Shia-majority country). "There are people and groups in Iraq that are, as much as they deny it, completely beholden to Iran, and that is not only unacceptable, but it is bad for the future of an ethnically and religiously diverse country," Turki said. http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/167646/20110622/saudi-arabia-iran-prince-turki-tehran-opec.htm (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Space Daily.com Ahmadinejad Insists Iran Not Seeking Nuclear Bomb By Staff Writers Tehran, Agence France-Presse (AFP) June 23, 2011 Hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad insisted Thursday that Iran is not seeking to build an atom bomb but defiantly added that should it decide to do so "no one can do a damn thing." "When we say we do not want to make bomb it means we do not want to," Ahmadinejad was quoted by the state television website as saying. "If we want to make a bomb we are not afraid of anyone and we are not afraid to announce it, no one can do a damn thing," he said during a ceremony inaugurating a sewage treatment plant in southern Tehran. Iranian officials have staunchly denied Western suspicions that Tehran's nuclear enrichment programme is masking a drive for atomic weapons. Parliamentary speaker Ali Larijani last year reiterated the denial by quoting a previous fatwa by supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the final say in the Islamic republic's affairs, which said "using weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear (arms) is haram (forbidden)."

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Ahmadinejad's comments come two weeks after the chief of Iranian atomic organisation Fereydoon Abbasi Davani announced plans to triple Tehran's capacity to enrich uranium to 20 percent level in a move Washington deemed "provocative." Despite being targeted by four sets of UN Security Council sanctions over its refusal to suspend uranium enrichment, Iran remains adamant that it will push ahead with its nuclear enrichment programme. Enriched uranium can produce either fuel for a nuclear reactor or the fissile material for an atomic warhead. Tehran insists it will use the substance to fuel its future nuclear power plants. Ahmadinejad also took a swipe at the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency, which has been investigating Tehran's nuclear programme for a number of years. "They have created something called the agency and have installed a bunch of puppets," he said in an apparent reference to Western powers, adding however that Iran had nevertheless cooperated with the IAEA. Ahmadinejad pointed to the Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan, saying that even though the "radiation was twice as much as was said ... even then the (IAEA) kept silent." Japan's earthquake and tsunami in March left nearly 25,000 people dead or missing, and knocked out cooling systems at the Fukushima nuclear power plant, leading reactors to overheat and triggering the worst nuclear crisis since Chernobyl 25 years ago. Ahmadinejad dubbed the IAEA's reports on Iran as "scrap paper," adding: "I asked them why are you silent there (about Fukushima) but it is not the same when it comes to Iran." http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Ahmadinejad_insists_Iran_not_seeking_nuclear_bomb_999.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

The West Australian – Australia Concrete Result Needed for Any Iran Visit: IAEA Chief By Fredrik Dahl and Sylvia Westall, Reuters June 24, 2011 VIENNA (Reuters) - The U.N. nuclear chief said on Friday he would consider accepting an invitation to visit Iran but stressed it would have to yield concrete results, urging Tehran to address suspicions of military-linked atom activity. Yukiya Amano, director general of the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said he had agreed in a meeting with Iran's atomic energy head Fereydoun Abbasi-Davani this week that the two sides needed to talk. But he said they remained far apart on substantive issues related to Iran's cooperation with the IAEA and Tehran's refusal to heed U.N. Security Council resolutions demanding it suspend sensitive nuclear work. Amano, who has taken a blunter approach towards the Islamic state than his predecessor Mohamed ElBaradei, met with Abbasi-Davani on the sidelines of a week-long, international nuclear safety meeting in the Austrian capital. Abbasi-Davani said after the June 21 meeting he had held "very good" and "transparent" talks with Amano and that he had invited him to visit the Islamic state's nuclear facilities. Asked about the invitation, Amano told a news conference: "I will consider visiting Tehran at an appropriate time but a constructive, concrete result is needed if I visit." It was the first time they had met since Abbasi-Davani, a nuclear scientist, was appointed head of Iran's atomic agency earlier this year.

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

The United Nations has imposed sanctions on him because of what Western officials said was his involvement in suspected nuclear weapons research. Amano, who said in a report last year that he feared Iran may be working to develop a nuclear-armed missile, said he had raised the issue of activities linked to the military in the country. "I asked for their cooperation to clarify these activities," he said. "There is no difference of view to continue the dialogue," Amano added. "But of course on substantial issues ... there is difference, it is obvious." VIRTUAL NUCLEAR STATE Western powers suspect Iran is seeking to develop a nuclear weapons capability. Tehran rejects the charge and says its nuclear programme is aimed at generating electricity. For several years, the IAEA has been investigating Western intelligence reports indicating Iran has coordinated efforts to process uranium, test explosives at high altitude and revamp a ballistic missile cone so it could take a nuclear warhead. Iran says the allegations are baseless and forged. Its refusal to halt enrichment has led to four rounds of U.N. sanctions on the major oil producer, as well tighter U.S. and European Union restrictions. Enriched uranium can have both civilian and military purposes. A former head of IAEA inspections worldwide, Olli Heinonen, said Iran seemed determined to at least achieve the capability to make a nuclear weapon, and the country could next year have enough fissile material for an atomic device. Heinonen, who resigned from the IAEA in 2010 and is now at Harvard University, made the comment to the U.S. House of Representatives' Committee on Foreign Affairs on Thursday. "It appears that Iran is determined to, at the very least, achieve a 'virtual nuclear weapon state' capability, or in other words be in a position to build a nuclear device, if it so decides," the Finnish nuclear expert said. "Based on present output capacity at Natanz and barring stops or slowdowns, Iran is able to generate sufficient amounts of fissile material at minimum for a nuclear device, sometime in 2012," he said, referring to Iran's Natanz enrichment plant. Editing by Andrew Heavens. http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/world/9706627/concrete-result-needed-for-any-iran-visit-iaea-chief/ (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Korea Herald – South Korea N. Korea could Test-Launch Missile at New Launch Site this Year: Expert June 21, 2011 North Korea could test-launch a missile this year from its second and more sophisticated launch site, in an apparent move to improve its long-range missile capabilities, a U.S. expert said Tuesday. South Korean and U.S. officials have monitored the new Tongchang-ri missile base on the North's west coast for more than two years, and satellite images showed early this year that construction of a launch tower at the base was nearly completed.

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

"What I can tell you is that the facility is pretty close to being ready to use. ... A trial launch at the Tongchang-ri site? I think that's possible that they could do it this year," Bruce W. Bennett, a senior defense analyst at RAND Corporation, a U.S. think tank, told Yonhap News Agency in an interview in Seoul. Bennett, however, said he has no substantive evidence North Korea was preparing for a missile launch, and part of the aim of the Tongchang-ri base is to put a satellite into orbit. "So they have to do a number of tests to prove that they could launch a satellite," Bennett said. "But in the process, a missile that can reach the United States could be tested." In January, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates publicly said that North Korea could develop missiles within five years that would directly threaten the U.S. North Korea test-launched a long-range Taepodong-2 missile in 2006, but it exploded 40 seconds after launch. Another Taepodong-2 traveled some 3,200 kilometers and landed in the Pacific Ocean in 2009. Tensions on the Korean Peninsula remain high after North Korea torpedoed a South Korean warship and shelled a southern border island last year, killing a total of 50 people, including two civilians. South Korean and U.S. military officials have warned that North Korea could carry out more provocations this year, but the allies have said they are better prepared to respond to such attacks. (Yonhap News) http://www.koreaherald.com/national/Detail.jsp?newsMLId=20110621000956 (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Yonhap News – South Korea June 22, 2011 Spy Chief Says Policy Failures Dealt Blow to N. Korea's Heir Apparent SEOUL, June 22 (Yonhap) -- A series of policy blunders in North Korea have dealt a blow to North Korean leader Kim Jong-il's son and heir apparent, Kim Jong-un, a ruling party lawmaker said Wednesday, citing Seoul's spy chief. The North carried out a currency reform in 2009 but it is believed to have caused strong public backlash as it led to massive inflation and worsened food shortages. The impoverished country has also dramatically cut its goal of building 100,000 houses by next year, the centennial of the birth of Kim Il-sung, the country's late founder and grandfather of Kim Jong-un. Kim's "leadership has been undermined as he failed in the currency reform and built only 500 houses, though he planned to build 100,000," ruling party lawmaker Hwang Jin-ha said, citing Won Sei-hoon, head of the National Intelligence Service. Won's reported comments at a closed-door session of the parliamentary intelligence committee come amid apparent efforts by North Korean leader Kim Jong-il to extend his family dynasty into a third generation since he suffered a stroke in 2008. He named his youngest son, Jong-un, vice chairman of the Central Military Commission of the North's ruling Workers' Party and a four-star general last year in the clearest sign yet to make him the next leader. The succession, if made, would mark communism's second hereditary power transfer. The elder Kim inherited power from his father, who died in 1994. Won also told the session that the North's heir apparent appears to be trying to exert his influence by taking a hard-line stance and resorting to military adventurism, such as the shelling of a front-line South Korean island, according to Hwang.

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

The North insisted the November shelling was provoked by South Korean firing drills on Yeonpyeong Island near their disputed sea border. The North has also refused to take responsibility for the sinking of a South Korean warship in March last year, keeping the two sides from repairing their relations for more than a year. Hwang also quoted Won as telling the lawmakers that the North Korean leader made requests to top Chinese officials during his trip to China in May, but there were differences of opinion. No details were given. http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/northkorea/2011/06/22/50/0401000000AEN20110622005051315F.HTML (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Montreal Gazette – Canada China Says No Cyber Warfare with U.S. By Don Durfee, Reuters June 22, 2011 BEIJING - There is no cyber warfare taking place between China and the United States, a senior Chinese official said on Wednesday, after weeks of friction over accusations that China may have launched a string of Internet hacking attacks. The two countries might suffer from cyber attacks, but they were in no way directed by either government, Vice Foreign Minister Cui Tiankai told a small group of foreign reporters ahead of a meeting with U.S. officials in Hawaii this weekend. "I want to clear something up: there are no contradictions between China and the United States" on the issue of hacking, Cui said. "Though hackers attack the U.S. Internet and China's Internet, I believe they do not represent any country," he added. Both countries were in fact already discussing the problem of hacking during their regular strategic consultations, Cui said. "The international community ought to come up with some rules to prevent this misuse of advanced technology," he added. State Department spokesman Mark Toner declined to comment on Cui's cyber-war comments, but said the inaugural U.S.-China Asia-Pacific Consultations in Honolulu had a general regional focus and no particular cyber warfare agenda. "My understanding is that it is about the Asia-Pacific region, writ large," he said in Washington. Kurt Campbell, the assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific affairs, would be Cui's counterpart in the talks, he said. The accusations against China have centred on an intrusion into the security networks of Lockheed Martin Corp. and other U.S. military contractors, as well as efforts to gain access to the Google email accounts of U.S. officials and Chinese human rights advocates. 'A MOST PRESSING MATTER' China has vociferously denied having anything to do with hacking attacks, saying it too is a major victim. "Internet security is an issue for all countries, and it is a most pressing matter," Cui said. "Of course, every country has different abilities when it comes to this problem," he added.

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

"The United States is the most advanced country in the world when it comes to this technology, and we hope they can step up communication and co-operation on this with other countries. We also hope this advanced technology is not used for destructive purposes." The Internet has become a major bone of contention between Washington and Beijing. This month, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Washington was seriously concerned about cyber attacks and was prepared to use force against those it considered an act of war. The latest friction over hacking could bring Internet policy back to the foreground of U.S.-China relations, reprising tension from last year when the Obama administration took up Google's complaints about hacking and censorship from China. Google partly pulled out of China after that dispute. Since then, it has lost more share to rival Baidu Inc. in China's Internet market. China, with more than 450 million Internet users, exercises tight control and censorship over the Web at home, and has strengthened its grip in recent months. In February, overseas Chinese websites, inspired by anti-authoritarian uprisings across the Arab world, called for protests across China, raising Beijing's alarm about dissent and prompting tightened restrictions over the Internet. China already blocks major foreign social websites such as Facebook and Twitter. U.S. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke, named by President Barack Obama as the next U.S. ambassador to China, said last week that the United States was looking into ways to craft trade countermeasures that treat curbs on Internet commerce as non-tariff barriers to trade. http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/China+says+cyber+warfare+with/4988579/story.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Korea Herald – South Korea N.K. May Have Grid-Disabling Nuke June 24, 2011 By Shin Hae-in North Korea may have developed a “super-EMP” weapon capable of emitting more gamma radiation than a 25- megaton nuclear weapon, a former CIA nuclear weapons analyst was quoted as saying by a U.S.-funded radio station Friday. Peter Vincent Pry told the Voice of America that a group of Russian nuclear weapons scientists approached him in 2004 to warn the U.S. that the technology to make the electromagnetic-pulse weapon had been leaked to North Korea. While Pyongyang’s nuclear tests in 2006 and 2009 have been dismissed as failures by some analysts because of their low explosive yield, the U.S. expert said they were actually the “signature” of the Russian-designed super- EMP, which could disable the electric power grid across most of the United States. The now-defunct Soviet Union had conducted an atmospheric test of an EMP weapon in 1962 over Kazakhstan, whose pulse wave set on fire a power station 300 kilometers away and destroyed it within 10 seconds. Such a weapon ― equal to a massive solar flare such as the “solar maxima” predicted by NASA to occur in 2012 ― poses substantial risk to equipment and operation of a nation’s power grid, and under extreme conditions could result in major long-term electrical outages, U.S. experts have warned. http://www.koreaherald.com/national/Detail.jsp?newsMLId=20110624000695

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

(Return to Articles and Documents List)

Korea Times – South Korea June 24, 2011 'Proliferation Could Lead to Pyongyang’s Demise' By Kim Young-jin North Korea’s suspected proliferation of weapons materials would come back to haunt the Kim Jong-il regime in a fatal way if they were used against the United States, a former U.S. intelligence director said. “North Korea seems willing to sell weapons and maybe even nuclear materials to other countries,” Dennis Blair, who recently served as President Barack Obama’s director of national intelligence, told Voice of America. “If...one of those countries or groups were to use them against the United States, I’m sure the U.S. would retaliate very strongly and that would probably be the end of the North Korean regime.” “Yet the North seems determined to sell as many things as it can get away with, as long as they can keep it a secret. There’s a chance for miscalculation there.” Concerns are rising over the North’s apparent proliferation of weapons and related materials to such countries as Myanmar, Iran and Syria. The sentiment was reinforced last month when a North Korean freighter suspected of containing illegal weapons and apparently en route to Myanmar was intercepted by a U.S. destroyer in waters off the coasts of China. The North is under an arms embargo due to international sanctions for its nuclear program. Blair said proliferation was the biggest North Korean threat facing Washington’s interests because Pyongyang would be wary of instigating a war on the peninsula given the U.S. military presence. He also expressed concern over a “network of countries” which trade illegal information and help each other develop weapons including North Korea, Pakistan, Iran and Syria. “I think North Korea, which had contacts with those countries for some of its illegal arms sales, was probably trying to get information in return. Some of the information that would be most valuable to them would be centrifuge enrichment and other nuclear things,” he said. In regard to the succession underway from leader Kim to his youngest son, Jong-un, Blair said he expected to see the ruling family come up against stiff challenges. “With such a suspicious and paranoid character as Kim Jong-il, I doubt it will be a very smooth and trouble-free process. I would imagine there would be bumps on the road,” he said. Kim Jong-un emerged as the heir when he was elevated to a four-star general last year. The biggest opposition could come in the case of the sudden death of the incumbent leader, who suffered a stroke in 2008. Many expect figures close to Jong-un, such as his uncle Jang Song-taek to shepherd the young man to power. “In the short term that group of influential people around the presidency will hang around and make sure it’s a smooth situation. After that there probably will be some sort of struggle for succession and I think it will include the leadership at the top with Kim Jong-un a part of it. The retired Admiral did not like the chances of that recent uprisings known as the “Arab Spring” would spread into the isolated North. “As closed as North Korea is to the outside world, as desperate as the poverty is, I just don’t see the materials for a bottom-up revolution as we have seen in many of Mideast and North African countries,” he said.

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530 http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2011/06/116_89561.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Yonhap News – South Korea June 24, 2011 Obama Extends National Emergency Against N. Korea By Lee Chi-dong WASHINGTON, June 23 (Yonhap) -- U.S. President Barack Obama issued a public notice Thursday to extend the national emergency in relation to North Korea that provides a legal and administrative basis for sanctions against the nuclear-armed communist nation. On the basis of the national emergency declared in 2008 under the National Emergencies Act, the Obama administration slapped tougher sanctions on Pyongyang in April, including a ban on direct and indirect imports of North Korean goods. "The existence and the risk of proliferation of weapons-usable fissile material on the Korean Peninsula, and the actions and policies of the Government of North Korea that destabilize the Korean Peninsula and imperil U.S. Armed Forces, allies, and trading partners in the region, continue to constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States," Obama said in a statement. "For these reasons, I have determined that it is necessary to continue the national emergency with respect to these threats and maintain in force the measures taken to deal with that national emergency." The national emergency, first declared on June 26, 2008, by then-President George W. Bush, is due to expire automatically unless the president announces each year that it will continue to be valid beyond the anniversary date of its declaration. http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/northkorea/2011/06/24/78/0401000000AEN20110624000600315F.HTML (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Indian Express – India India will get Russian N-Sub by December Wednesday, June 22, 2011 New Delhi: After a long wait, India is set to get the advanced ‘Nerpa’ nuclear attack submarine on lease from Russia by the end of this year, a senior Russian official said. While India still does not officially talk about the 10- year lease that has been in the works for years, news about the delivery of the nuclear submarine comes from the head of the Russian Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation. Meanwhile, reports say that China will begin sea trials of its first aircraft carrier by next week, making its entry into a select club of nations that operate aircraft carriers. The Chinese carrier — remade from a Russian carrier that was brought as scrap — hit headlines after China’s Army Chief General Chen Bingde officially acknowledged its existence last week. The news of sea trials as early as next week has come as a surprise to India, which had estimated that the ship would be ready by 2013-14. http://www.indianexpress.com/news/India-will-get-Russian-n-sub-by-December/807029/ (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Economic Times – India

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

22 June, 2011 Press Trust of India (PTI) Progressive Steps Needed to De-legitimise N-Weapons: PM NEW DELHI: Pitching for "progressive steps" to de-legitimise nuclear weapons, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh today said a meaningful dialogue was needed among countries having atomic weapons to build trust and reduce the dangers of their accidental or unauthorised use. In his message to the 'Global Zero Summit' in London being held from today, he said the goal of nuclear disarmament can be achieved by a step-by-step process underwritten by a universal commitment and an agreed multilateral framework that is global and non-discriminatory. "Progressive steps are needed for the de-legitimization of nuclear weapons. Measures to reduce nuclear dangers arising from accidental or unauthorized use of nuclear weapons, increasing restraints on the use of nuclear weapons and de-alerting of nuclear weapons are essential steps," he said. "There is need for a meaningful dialogue among all states possessing nuclear weapons to build trust and confidence and for reducing the salience of nuclear weapons in international affairs and security doctrines," Singh said. Extending his best wishes for the success of the conference, he said "this campaign can be taken forward by forging a renewed consensus on non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament." He said public awareness and support was vital to generate and sustain "an irreversible momentum until we reach our cherished goal of a world without nuclear weapons. Transforming this vision into reality is a task worthy" of the participants of the Global Zero Campaign. http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/progressive-steps-needed-to-de-legitimise-n- weapons-pm/articleshow/8953709.cms (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Indian Express – India Pakistan’s Nuclear Arsenal Not at Risk, Says Blake Wednesday, June 22, 2011 New Delhi: Amid growing concerns about the safety of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, the US Assistant Secretary for South and Central Asian Affairs Robert O Blake Jr said Tuesday that Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal was “not at risk”. “We don’t think there is any renewed concern... those assets remain under much tighter security than what we saw in Pakistan’s naval base,” Blake said in an interaction with mediapersons in New Delhi. He was referring to the attack on PNS Mehran in Karachi, which had led to concerns about the safety of nuclear weapons in Pakistan. On the 26/11 trial, he said the US would like to see the trial progress as quickly as possible. He said all ISI officials named in the Tahawwur Rana trial in Chicago would be “brought to justice”. When asked about the talks between India and Pakistan, he said the US “welcomed progress” made, “particularly, the forthcoming dialogue between the foreign secretaries” of the two countries. India’s economic rise, Blake added, “provides an opportunity for Pakistan”, and the US feels a “breakthrough in trade is important”. http://www.indianexpress.com/news/Pakistan-s-nuclear-arsenal-not-at-risk--says-Blake/806975/ (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Ha’aretz Daily – Israel

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

June 23, 2011 Nuclear Experts Killed in Russia Plane Crash Helped Design Iran Facility The five Russian scientists were among 44 killed earlier this week; no official investigation of foul play has been opened, though Iranian nuclear experts have in the past been involved in similar accidents. By Amir Oren The five nuclear experts killed in a plane crash in northern Russia earlier this week had assisted in the design of an Iranian atomic facility, security sources in Russia said on Thursday. The five Russian experts were among the 44 passengers killed when the Tupolev-134 plane broke up and caught fire on landing outside the northern city of Petrozavodsk on Monday. The experts - who included lead designers Sergei Rizhov, Gennadi Benyok, Nicolai Tronov and Russia's top nuclear technological experts, Andrei Tropinov - worked at Bushehr after the contract for the plant's construction passed from the German Siemens company to Russian hands. The five were employed at the Hydropress factory, a member of Russia's state nuclear corporation, and one of the main companies to contract for the Bushehr construction. The sources said that the death of the scientists is a great blow to the Russian nuclear industry. The experts were tasked with completing construction of the plant and ensuring that it would be able to survive an earthquake. According to the sources, although Iranian nuclear scientists have in the past been involved in unexplained accidents and plane crashes, there is no official suspicion of foul play. Investigators are probing human error and technical malfunction as the causes of the crash. http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/nuclear-experts-killed-in-russia-plane-crash-helped-design- iran-facility-1.369226 (Return to Articles and Documents List)

TIME Chavez's Odd Silence Raises Questions By CHRISTOPHER TOOTHAKER, Associated Press Friday, June 24, 2011 (CARACAS, Venezuela) — Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is one of the world's most talkative leaders and his prolonged silence and seclusion in Cuba following surgery there two weeks ago is fueling speculation about his health. Government officials have offered repeated assurances that Chavez is recovering well in Havana, but many Venezuelans are wondering if they are getting the true story. Venezuelans are accustomed to near daily speeches and television appearances by Chavez that can last several hours, even when he's traveling abroad. Yet nobody has heard him speak since he talked by telephone with Venezuelan state television on June 12, saying he was quickly recovering from surgery two days earlier for a pelvic abscess. He said medical tests showed no sign of any "malignant" illness.

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

The only glimpse of Chavez came when the Cuban government released photos of the Venezuelan leader at the hospital with Fidel Castro and Cuban President Raul Castro on June 17. In one, Chavez seems to lean on Raul Castro for support. Venezuelan officials have limited their comments on Chavez's health to saying only that he's recuperating and have provided few details. It is not even clear exactly when he will return to Venezuela. The paucity of information has fed a stream of serious speculation about the socialist president's condition as well as outlandish gossip on both sides of Venezuela's deep political divide. Some people suspect Chavez has been diagnosed with a life-threatening illness such as prostate or colon cancer while others claim doctors botched liposuction surgery and he suffered an infection. Even before his pelvic surgery, a knee injury forced him to postpone his trip to Brazil, Ecuador and Cuba. These problems have fed speculation about the 56-year-old president's health at a time when Venezuela is grappling with recurring electricity shortages and a deadly prison standoff. Authorities have sought to quash such talk. "In response to all the rumors, I can give faith that the president is recovering in a satisfactory manner," Adan Chavez, one of the leader's brothers who is a state governor, told state television Wednesday. "The president is a strong man." Adan Chavez added that "it's not clear" when his younger brother would return home, but said the president is expected to leave Cuba within 10 to 12 days. Those comments did little to calm the consternation of Chavez supporters or appease government critics who accuse officials of trying to dupe Venezuelans. "I fear his condition could be worse then than they want to tell us, but I trust in God the president isn't in danger," said Magalis Gonzalez, a street vendor who was among about 100 Chavez supporters who attended a prayer meeting in downtown Caracas on Thursday to wish the president a speedy recovery. The president's opponents have criticized government officials for providing few details on Chavez's health and raised concerns he may not be fit to continue his duties as president. The latter idea was rejected by Vice President Elias Jaua, who said Chavez is attending to his day-to-day government duties while recuperating. In an editorial published Thursday, the opposition-siding newspaper El Nacional complained that "incompetent Cabinet ministers are turning this into a complete mystery or a state secret that creates uncertainty and anxiety within the population." "Nobody understands why the state of the president's health is being hidden," it said. Officials say Chavez underwent surgery June 10 for a pelvic abscess, which is an accumulation of pus that can have various causes, including infection or surgical complications. Neither Chavez nor doctors treating him have disclosed what caused the abscess. Dr. Demetrios Braddock, an associate professor of pathology at Yale University's School of Medicine in New Haven, Connecticut, said surgery for a pelvic abscess is not usually difficult although complications can arise if doctors discover a digestive disease such as diverticulitis. Diverticulitis, which is most commonly found in the large intestine, involves the formation of pouches on the outside of the colon. Braddock said the disease can be potentially life-threatening if a perforation of the colonic wall occurs, allowing feces to pass into the pelvic cavity and causing infections. "Any number of things could be happening," Braddock said in a telephone interview. "It's impossible to know for sure without being familiar with this particular case."

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530 http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2079702,00.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Miami Herald Wednesday, June 22, 2011 Pentagon Gets Cyberwar Guidelines By LOLITA C. BALDOR, Associated Press WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama has signed executive orders that lay out how far military commanders around the globe can go in using cyberattacks and other computer-based operations against enemies and as part of routine espionage in other countries. The orders detail when the military must seek presidential approval for a specific cyber assault on an enemy and weave cyber capabilities into U.S. war fighting strategy, defense officials and cyber security experts told The Associated Press. Signed more than a month ago, the orders cap a two-year Pentagon effort to draft U.S. rules of the road for cyber warfare, and come as the U.S. begins to work with allies on global ground rules. The guidelines are much like those that govern the use of other weapons of war, from nuclear bombs to missiles to secret surveillance, the officials said. In a broad new strategy document, the Pentagon lays out some of the cyber capabilities the military may use during peacetime and conflict. They range from planting a computer virus to using cyberattacks to bring down an enemy's electrical grid or defense network. "You don't have to bomb them anymore. That's the new world," said James Lewis, cybersecurity expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. The new Pentagon strategy, he said, lays out cyber as a new warfare domain and stresses the need to fortify network defenses, protect critical infrastructure and work with allies and corporate partners. The entire strategy has not been released, but several U.S. officials described it on condition of anonymity. Many aspects of it have been made public by U.S. officials, including Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn, in speeches over the past several months. The Pentagon is expected to announce the entire strategy soon. As an example, the new White House guidelines would allow the military to transmit computer code to another country's network to test the route and make sure connections work - much like using satellites to take pictures of a location to scout out missile sites or other military capabilities. The digital code would be passive and could not include a virus or worm that could be triggered to do harm at a later date. But if the U.S. ever got involved in a conflict with that country, the code would have mapped out a path for any offensive cyberattack to take, if approved by the president. The guidelines also make clear that when under attack, the U.S. can defend itself by blocking cyber intrusions and taking down servers in another country. And, as in cases of mortar or missile attacks, the U.S. has the right to pursue attackers across national boundaries - even if those are virtual network lines. "We must be able to defend and operate freely in cyberspace," Lynn said in a speech last week in Paris. The U.S., he said, must work with other countries to monitor networks and share threat information. Lynn and others also say the Pentagon must more aggressively protect the networks of defense contractors that possess valuable information about military systems and weapons' designs. In a new pilot program, the Defense

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Department has begun sharing classified threat intelligence with a handful of companies to help them identify and block malicious cyber activity on their networks. Over time, Lynn said, the program could be a model for the Homeland Security Department as it works with companies that run critical infrastructure such as power plants, the electric grid and financial systems. Members of Congress are working on a number of bills to address cybersecurity and have encouraged such public- private partnerships, particularly to secure critical infrastructure. But they also warn of privacy concerns. "We must institute strict oversight to ensure that no personal communications or sensitive data are inappropriately shared with the government by businesses," said Rep. Jim Langevin, D-R.I., who served as co- chairman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies' cybersecurity commission. Cyber security experts and defense officials have varying views of cyber war, but they agree that it will be a part of any future conflict. At a recent Capitol Hill hearing, incoming Pentagon chief Leon Panetta, the outgoing CIA director, said the U.S. must be aggressive in offensive and defensive countermeasures. "I've often said that there's a strong likelihood that the next Pearl Harbor that we confront could very well be a cyberattack that cripples our power systems, our grid, our security systems, our financial systems, our governmental systems," he said. Stewart Baker, a former Homeland Security official, said Americans need to come to grips with the idea that cyber warfare could hit the U.S. homeland. "We've had 50 years in which we haven't really had to rethink what might happen in a war here," he said. "We need to think very hard about an actual strategy about how to win a war in which cyber weapons are prominently featured." Part of that thinking, Baker said, involves ensuring that the U.S. has strong firewalls to prevent attacks and that there are established routes into the networks of potential enemies. But officials also say that cyber capabilities must be put in perspective. "It's a decisive weapon, but it's not a super weapon," said Lewis. "It's not a nuclear bomb." It is, however, a new weapon that hackers, criminals and other nations are honing. Already hackers have breached military networks and weapons programs, including key defense contractor Lockheed Martin. Military officials have also warned repeatedly of cyberattacks and intrusions coming out of China, Russia and Eastern Europe. "Regrettably," Lynn said, "few weapons in the history of warfare, once created, have gone unused. For this reason, we must have the capability to defend against the full range of cyber threats." Lynn predicted that terror groups eventually will learn how to launch crippling cyberattacks. Important questions linger about the role of neutral countries. Hackers routinely route their attacks through networks of innocent computers that could be anywhere, including in the U.S. Often it may be difficult to tell exactly where an attack originated or who did it, although forensic capabilities are steadily improving. That issue was clear during the cyberattack against Estonia in 2007 that used thousands of infected computers to cripple dozens of government and corporate websites. Estonia has blamed Russia for the attack. But, according to Robert Giesler, the Pentagon's former director of information operations, 17 percent of the computers that attacked Estonia were in the United States. He said the

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530 question is: Did the Estonians have the right to attack the U.S. in response, and what responsibility did the U.S. bear? Under the new Pentagon guidelines, it would be unacceptable to deliberately route a cyberattack through another country if that nation has not given permission - much like U.S. fighter jets need permission to fly through another nation's airspace. http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/06/22/v-fullstory/2278415/pentagon-gets-cyberwar-guidelines.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Global Security Newswire Senate Bill Echoes House Questions about Obama's Nuclear Strategy Wednesday, June 22, 2011 By Elaine M. Grossman, Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee last week issued new legislation that echoes questions about President Obama's nuclear weapons strategy initially raised last month in the House (see GSN, May 27). The fiscal 2012 defense authorization bill approved unanimously by the panel calls for a presidential report "describing any new nuclear employment strategy if and when such a strategy is issued," according to a Senate committee release. The demand apparently stems from lawmaker concerns that a new round of strategic arms control reductions below current treaty ceilings could require a change in nuclear targeting approach in which Washington focuses strikes on population centers, rather than on an adversary's military installations. The thinking is that some sort of alternative targeting scheme might be required if much deeper cuts are taken in the stockpile because fewer weapons would be available for hitting enemy assets. The Obama administration has said the Defense Department is studying the prospects for additional reductions below caps set by a recently enacted U.S.-Russian nuclear arms control deal, but has not yet determined whether that would require any such changes in strategy. The Senate bill also requires the White House to submit to Congress a "net assessment" to support any new proposal "to reduce the nuclear weapons stockpile below the numbers in the New START treaty or to reduce the number of hedge weapons in the stockpile," the panel said last week. It offered no additional detail on what the assessment must entail. The hedge force consists of backup warheads that could be put on alert in a crisis, in case a resurgent threat develops or a major technical problem is discovered in fielded weapons. The bipartisan legislation, dubbed S. 981, additionally directs the Defense secretary to provide an "accounting report" that tallies both deployed and nondeployed weapons in the U.S. arsenal, the committee stated in its Friday release. The bill text and committee report have not yet been made public but could be released by the end of this week, according to Senate aides. Lawmakers reportedly are hopeful the defense spending authorization package will go to the Senate floor for debate and a vote prior to the summer recess, which begins on August 8. The next budget year begins on October 1. The Senate committee measure appears aimed at staking out a more moderate approach to nuclear weapons strategy, modernization and arms control issues than House fiscal 2012 legislation that prompted a White House

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530 veto threat. While House lawmakers erected some potentially serious obstacles to further nuclear cutbacks or targeting-strategy changes, the Senate merely called for reports. It is unclear, however, whether the new Senate legislation will nonetheless trigger a similar standoff with the president. A White House spokeswoman on Monday directed a reporter to the Office of Management and Budget's May 24 statement in reaction to the House defense authorization bill, but offered no comment about the Senate version. The House legislation, known as H.R. 1540, includes so-called "New START Implementation" provisions that would restrict the administration's ability to cut deployed or nondeployed nuclear weapons below levels set by the accord, unless required by a treaty or authorized by Congress. New START, which entered into force in February, caps U.S. and Russian deployed strategic nuclear warheads to 1,550 on each side, down from a ceiling of 2,200 imposed by an earlier treaty. It limits fielded strategic nuclear delivery systems at 700, with an additional 100 platforms allowed in reserve. Under certain conditions, the House measure could also prohibit the executive branch from eliminating weapons from the hedge force until the mid-2020s, when a new plutonium facility at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and a uranium facility at Oak Ridge, Tenn., are scheduled to be built and operating. In terms of the Pentagon's nuclear targeting approach, the House bill would actually prevent the president from adopting a "countervalue" strategy -- a shift that Republicans have charged would introduce an "immoral" rise in civilian casualties during a nuclear war. This passage in the legislation would also require the president to certify that any new strategy uses all three legs of the nuclear triad: ICBMs, bomber aircraft, and submarine-based ballistic missiles. To save money and reduce the role that nuclear weapons play in U.S. national security, some defense experts have recommended eliminating one or more legs of the triad -- an option that more hawkish lawmakers typically reject (see GSN, Dec. 16, 2009). Senator Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) and Representative Michael Turner (R-Ohio) spearheaded the New START Implementation measures, saying they would help ensure the Obama administration remains accountable for nuclear modernization and arms control pledges it made last year during the treaty ratification process (see GSN, May 10). In a bid to draw enough Republican votes in favor of the treaty to meet a required two-thirds majority, the White House said it would request more than $85 billion over the next decade to build new nuclear research and production facilities and overhaul aging warheads (see GSN, Nov. 15, 2010). The Senate ratified New START last December in a 71-26 vote, which included the support of 13 GOP lawmakers (see GSN, Dec. 22, 2010). The White House budget office last month said that Obama's staff might recommend that he veto defense authorization legislation if it includes the House version's "onerous conditions on the administration's ability to implement the treaty, as well as to retire, dismantle or eliminate nondeployed nuclear weapons." The House action, if ultimately embraced by a conference committee of lawmakers from both chambers, could also impede the government's capacity "to support the long-term safety, security and reliability of our nuclear deterrent," according to the budget office release. "I don't know yet whether a [Statement of Administration Policy] will be released" in response to the new Senate committee legislation, as well, OMB spokeswoman Meg Reilly said in an e-mailed response to questions. "The administration has not yet taken a position" on it, she said. Defense authorization bills typically lay out policy and programmatic direction for the Pentagon, while appropriations bills are required before money can be spent during a given fiscal year. Once reconciled by conference committees, the authorization and appropriations legislation is to be sent to the White House for presidential signature or veto.

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530 http://www.globalsecuritynewswire.org/gsn/nw_20110622_3221.php (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Washington Times Inside the Ring By Bill Gertz, the Washington Times June 22, 2011 No Early-Intercept Defense A forthcoming study by the Pentagon's Defense Science Board concludes that an Obama administration plan to shoot down long-range Iranian missiles shortly after launch will not work. Portions of the classified study were disclosed recently during a hearing of the Senate Appropriations defense subcommittee by Sen. Richard C. Shelby, Alabama Republican. “The report’s unclassified conclusion is that *Missile Defense Agency+ plans to achieve an early intercept capability as part of the Phased-Adaptive Approach are simply not credible,” Mr. Shelby said June 15. The administration’s four-phase plan for European-based defenses calls for using three versions of the Navy SM-3 interceptor missile instead of more capable and faster Ground-Based Interceptor (GBI) missiles, like those currently deployed in Alaska and California. The phased approach calls for ultimately fielding a souped-up variant of the SM-3 called Block IIB by 2020. The interceptor would be used against Iran’s arsenal of medium-range, intermediate-range and perhaps continental range missiles. In the future, the Pentagon has said it plans to use to Block IIB for so-called “early intercept” — before a missile releases its warhead and decoys. A congressional aide said the conclusions of the report were “very shocking” when administration officials disclosed them during a recent briefing to staff members. Missile speeds and the short times military officials have to make a decision to fire interceptors at an enemy missile means “early intercept wasn’t feasible for missile defense,” the aide said. Boost-phase intercept is possible but only for extremely narrow target-area near-missile launch locations. Defense subcommittee senators will be looking at ways to modify funding plans for missile defense programs this year in response to the report, the aide said. Mr. Shelby said the report was disturbing because the Pentagon promised to develop an early intercept capability for the SM-3 Block IIB missile by 2020 that “was the central justification — as I understood it — to cancel the third site in Europe and to kill the *Kinetic Energy Interceptor+ boost phase defense program.” The third site would have deployed Ground-Based Interceptors in Poland and a radar in Czech Republic, after the two current sites in Alaska and California. That plan was rejected by President Obama, amid opposition from Russia, as part of the plan to reset ties with Moscow. “Now it looks like the nation may be left with an inadequate defense in Europe and no boost-phase intercept capability,” Mr. Shelby said. Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at the hearing of the early-intercept program that “the whole issue of boost-phase intercept is an extraordinarily difficult technical challenge.” “And at least if someone’s broken through on that, I haven’t seen that,” Adm. Mullen said. Critics of the Phased Adaptive Approach have said that without larger interceptors, Europe-based missile defenses will be unable to defend the eastern United States from a future long-range Iranian missile strike.

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

The science board study was ordered by Ashton B. Carter, undersecretary of defense for acquisition, in December 2009 to update an earlier report. The board was told to study whether the three SM-3 variants could be used to knock out a salvo of more than 30 missiles shortly after launch. “Engaging ballistic missiles during this phase of the missile’s trajectory could provide some advantages leading to significantly increased cost effectiveness of missile defense,” Mr. Carter stated in a memorandum. Types of attacks to be studied included intermediate-range missiles as well as a “clandestine sea-launched” missiles fired from a freighter, something Iran has practiced, the memo said. Defense officials said the report is a final draft and still undergoing security review. “Apparently the report is now being finalized and only an interim report was briefed to Congress,” said a Missile Defense Agency official. “It is our understanding that the final report will underscore the value and feasibility of early intercept technology and the need for the Precision Tracking Space System satellite architecture to optimize early intercept capabilities.” http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jun/22/inside-the-ring-570111796/?page=all#pagebreak (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Aviation Week AFGSC to Renew Conventional Capabilities June 23, 2011 By David A. Fulghum After a two-year refurbishment of the U.S. Air Force’s nuclear arsenal, the armed service’s Global Strike Command is shifting focus to upgrading its conventional capabilities. The effort is being driven by aging of the B-2 bomber’s stealth signature; introduction of advanced, electronically scanned array (AESA) radars into foreign-made air defenses; and the Pentagon’s need to generate requirements for a new, $3.7 billion, long-range, stealthy strike aircraft, the organization’s leaders say. Lt. Gen. James Kowalski, head of the command, was in Washington this week making congressional calls and speaking at a nearby seminar sponsored by the National Defense University. Global Strike Command maintains 16 B-2s and 44 B-52s, plus an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) force for operational missions. Twelve B-2s have been upgraded with advanced, low-probability-of-intercept radars and the ability to carry the massive ordnance penetrator (MOP) bomb for hardened, underground targets. Right now, the B-52 is the primary carrier of standoff weapons. It is also being modernized with advanced sensors, software, communications and an internal weapons bay upgrade that “increases the B-52 payload by two-thirds,” Kowalski says. On the first day of the no-fly-zone campaign over Libya, two B-2s were able to destroy “44-45 hardened aircraft shelters and took out almost the whole *of Tripoli’s+ air force,” in a single mission flown from the U.S., says a Strike Command staff member. They were able to fly well above Libya’s most modern air defense weapon, the Russian- made SA-26, which has an effective altitude of about 11,000 ft. Otherwise, Tripoli’s air defenses were quite old. However, new long-range, high-speed air-defense missiles, directed by advanced radars that increase the ability to detect stealth, are on the world market. They are being deployed as part of an asymmetric anti-access, denial-of- airspace strategy by a number of countries, including China. U.S. planners are working on the next generation of tactics, weapons, aircraft and sensors to re-establish U.S. access during military operations.

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

These include a “long-range-strike family of systems to provide a broad range of conventional and nuclear options,” Kowalski says. As the B-2’s signature is compromised by longer-range, higher-resolution radars, it will have to rely on employing standoff weapons, including a new “survivable” cruise missile that can penetrate integrated air defense to replace the air-launched cruise missiles (ALCM) by 2025. The current ALCM, with upgrades, is expected to serve through 2030, Kowalski says. Other components of an updated strike force may include participation in the Navy’s Next-Generation Jammer program and the development of off-board sensors and advanced communications carried by stealthy, unmanned, adjunct aircraft designed to support the optionally manned bombers. http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=aerospacedaily&id=news/asd/2011/06/23/ 02.xml&headline=AFGSC%20To%20Renew%20Conventional%20Capabilities (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Reuters.com Nuclear Terrorism Can Cause another Fukushima: Expert By Fredrik Dahl, Reuters Vienna, Thursday, June 23, 2011 (Reuters) - Global action to protect the nuclear industry against possible terrorist attacks is urgently needed, a leading expert said, as are safety steps to prevent any repeat of Japan's Fukushima accident. "Both al Qaeda and Chechen terrorist groups have repeatedly considered sabotaging nuclear reactors -- and Fukushima provided a compelling example of the scale of terror such an attack might cause," Matthew Bunn of Harvard University said. Some countries had "extraordinarily weak security measures in place," he said in an Internet blog posted this week, without naming them. "The nuclear industry in many countries is much less prepared to cope with security incidents than with accidents," wrote Bunn, an associate professor at Harvard Kennedy School who specializes in nuclear issues. Steps to protect against both sabotage of nuclear facilities and theft of nuclear weapons or the materials to make them were "particularly urgent." Bunn was reacting to new proposals by the head of the U.N. nuclear agency aimed at improving international nuclear safety following Japan's crisis which was caused by a massive earthquake and huge tsunami on March 11. Three reactors at the Fukushima complex went into meltdown when power and cooling functions failed, causing radiation to leak and forcing the evacuation of some 80,000 people. "The chance that the next big radioactive release will happen because someone wanted to make it happen may well be bigger than the chance that it will happen purely by accident," Bunn said. Yukiya Amano, director general of the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), opened a major safety meeting in Vienna on Monday by calling for international, random safety checks on nuclear reactors around the world. Amano also said countries should assess risks on all their reactors within 18 months to make sure they could withstand extreme natural events of the kind that crippled Fukushima. His proposals may meet resistance from those which want safety to remain a strictly national issue. The week-long meeting of the IAEA's 151 member states ends on Friday.

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Bunn said Amano's five-point plan was sensible but that he had missed a crucial point: "Disasters like Fukushima can be caused not only be accident but by terrorist action." Editing by Richard Meares. http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/23/us-nuclear-security-idUSTRE75M1SU20110623 (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Korea Times – South Korea OPINION S. Korea Does Not Need Nuclear Weapons ― Yet June 22, 2011 By Robert E. Kelly In teaching international security in Korea, I am regularly asked if Korea should have or will have nuclear weapons. North Korea has them obviously, so, not surprisingly, South Koreans are increasingly thinking they should have them too. While it seems straight-forward to say the North has them, therefore the South should have them too, I think this is inaccurate ― and not because America doesn’t want the South to nuclearize. Koreans bristle at this, as many states in the world do, because they feel that the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) constitutes nuclear discrimination. The haves (including the U.S.) get to keep their nuclear weapons, while the have-nots stay de-nuclear on the vague promise that the haves will build down to zero. Needless to say, the NPT haves have done little on this, leading to regular cries of hypocrisy (although President Barak Obama seems to genuinely want “global zero”). So last decade, India openly rejected this logic and went nuclear despite the nuclear haves’ resistance. Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea followed. But the South’s potential possession of nuclear weapons would not actually serve local security from the North. Pyongyang’s nuclear use would immediately trigger the South’s invasion of the North. It is impossible to imagine the South absorbing a nuclear strike without this finally forcing Seoul’s hand to invade the North and end the long inter-Korean stalemate. A nuclear strike would be so devastating that no other possible retaliation ― airstrikes, port-mining, more sanctions, closing Gaeseong ― would be seriously countenanced. While the initial casus belli would be to suppress the North’s nuclear capabilities and force regime change, in reality, the invasion would quickly to turn into a war of national unification ― a second Korean war to finally close the rift. Every analyst I’ve ever heard or read thinks that the South would win such a war ― even without U.S., Japanese, or U.N. help. It would be a harder slog alone of course, but victory is still quite likely. In the wake of its victory, the South would have to rebuild the North, including cleaning up blast zones in the North from the U.S. or the South’s own nuclear strikes a short time earlier. As such, the South is unlikely to ever launch in the first place. There is no point in creating mass devastation one must fix a short time later. More formally stated, a second-strike by the South is irrelevant, because a first-strike by the North would change Seoul’s preferences toward from defense and deterrence to irredentism. The North’s first-strike would end the South’s hesitation and confusion regarding the communist state, and push it openly toward intra-Korean “imperialism,” i.e., irredentism and unity. Note the difference between the two Koreas, and the U.S. and the USSR. Neither the U.S. nor the USSR had any compunction about nuking each other’s homeland, because neither expected to bear the clean-up costs. The same might be argued for the Indo-Pakistani nuclear competition today. But Korea is different. The South would not nuke the North in response to a first-strike and then just walk away. The North’s first-strike ― given the special “divided nation” status of the peninsula ― would push the South into the long-awaited, much-speculated-upon Second Korean War. And this time there would be a clear winner who would then have to pay for all the

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530 reconstruction. So it would be better in a unified Korea to have, say, just five blast-zones in the South, rather than yet five more in the North. The only possible alternative is the South’s nuclear use on the North if the South was actually losing the unification war. If the North launched a first-strike that devastated multiple Southern cities and threw the military into disarray, then the South might consider a “counter-force” nuclear strike on the North Korean People’s Army in order to slow it down and buy the Southern military time to reorganize and win the war. NATO considered similar counter-force strikes in WWIII scenarios. If the Red Army was rolling through Western Europe on the way to victory, NATO reserved the right to “first-use” against military assets to stem the Soviet tide. But even these strikes would be very limited in Korea ― likely low- yield battlefield nuclear weapons. The idea of nuking Northern cities ― “counter-value” city-busting ― is likely off the table due to the massive reconstruction costs that Seoul would have to carry for such strikes a short time later. And global opinion would likely regard strategic counter-value strikes in the North as a war crime. Beyond the North, the South’s nuclear weapons might be construed against China, Russia, and Japan ― the first two of whom are nuclear. Charles de Gaulle famously said French missiles pointed “360 degrees.” And the initial aim of the French nuclear program was as much Germany as the Soviet Union. After three German invasions in 70 years, the French military wanted the ultimate guarantee of French sovereignty that nuclear weapons would give. South Korea might think the same way regarding Japan, the former colonizer (a surprising number of Koreans still think Japan has imperial designs on Korea). And of course, the South lives next the Chinese goliath. Should the U.S. alliance with South Korea dissolve under the weight of American indebtedness, the South might seek nuclear weapons to hedge China. Finally, the South might nuclearize solely for prestige purposes as India did. But extra-peninsular deterrence is rarely discussed in the Korean media, where most of the nuclear focus is on the North. Yet the South is so unlikely to nuke the North because the former would carry the clean-up costs, that the latter would read Southern nuclearization as a hollow gesture. Worse, the North would likely spin Southern nuclearization as “aggression” and yet another reason for the Korean division. Post-unification however ― and especially if the U.S. slowly retrenches from Asia ― the South’s nuclearization is far more likely. Robert E. Kelly is an assistant professor of international relations in the Department of Political Science and Diplomacy at Pusan National University. The views expressed in the above article are the author’s own and do not reflect the editorial policy of The Korea Times. http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/opinon/2011/06/137_89394.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Pakistan Observer – Pakistan OPINION Wednesday, June 22, 2011 Mind Your Own Nukes Please! By Maimuna Ashraf Incidents which took place in May 2011 marked a great impact on the geo strategic scene of the region. Yes I am speaking about the impious Abbottabad raid that held on May 2 and the wicked attack on Pakistan Naval Airbase PNS Mehran on 23 May. These incidents provided an entailed chance to many who love to propagate the issue of Pakistan’s Nuke security. It was very much predictable that the western leaders and media who has since long been trickery up the frightening scenarios of Pakistan’s nuclear assets falling into the hands of terrorist, would be quick at covetous this lapse in security, to use it to add essence to their fears. NATO secretary General Rasmussen questioned about the safety of our nuclear arsenal in the light of the Mehran base attack has opined that though

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530 he is confident about the safety of the nuclear arsenals, the incident has raised concerns. Both the NY Times and The Los Angeles Times have called into question the ability of Pakistan’s security agencies to protect the 100-odd nuclear weapons after their failure at the naval base. Washington is apprehensive in expressing its views openly, but India being a traditional hostile state is showing more contiguous expressions to be troubled by a nuclear heist. Similarly, according to WikiLeaks France and Britain have also expressed their concerns about the safety and security of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. We are concerned with the safety of Pakistan’s nuclear installations, as the senior official travelling with prime minister Manmohan Singh in Africa were quoted as saying that “the real risk is internal-who guards the guardians”. So after observing all these statements, it seems that a party line has been adopted by the Western and Indians to surge propaganda in order to label Pakistan as an irresponsible nuclear weapon state. The main threat to Pakistan behind all this propaganda is the US efforts to extend the Cooperative Threat Reduction Programme (CTR) to denuclearize Pakistan in the grasp of support for nuclear security and safety. The CTR programme was started in 1991 by the Nunn-Lugar after the disintegration of the former Soviet Union. Lugar is the same person who introduced Kerry Lugar Bill for Pakistan. In 2009, Senator Richard Lugar said that CTR programme should also be extended to Pakistan. CTR was aimed to help states of former Soviet Union in controlling and protecting their nuclear weapons, weapons usable material and delivery systems. The main objectives under CTR were strategic offensive arms elimination, nuclear warhead dismantlement, nuclear weapons storage security, chemical weapons destruction, biological weapons proliferation prevention, reactor core conversions, nuclear material protection, control and accounting, export control initiatives, defense conversions and others. CTR mainly worked on Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Belarus. Nuclear weapons in these countries were dismantled by the US under the CTR programme. So it is very much true that ‘Do More’ demand is a conspiracy against our nuclear assets. US want to extend this programme to Pakistan because under CTR it would be imperative for Pakistan to provide information of its civilian and military nuclear facilities and give access to CTR teams to its nuclear installations. Pakistan doesn’t require such assistance; it has the capability to defend its nuclear arsenal and facilities. Pakistan doesn’t have that much facilities or warheads as the former Soviet Union had at that time. Pakistan has only few nuclear facilities and warheads and for them an effective mechanism is already in place. Pakistan is not a member of Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) but still it has always adhered to the IAEA safeguards standards for its nuclear installations. In Pakistan not a single incident of recklessness regarding nukes appeared in media like Indian and Western nukes. In last year news came up that US lost communication with some 50 missiles. It was not first and last time, such blunders happened in cold war both from US and former Soviet Union side and many such incidents occurred from the US side in last decade when in 2007 several nuclear bombs were lost for 36 hours, moreover when White House once lost the presidential authorization codes for launching a nuclear strike and they went missing for months. Similarly India who is very active in propagating Pakistan’s nuclear security, itself has a grave account in nuclear leakages. This is another story that these incidents of Indian Nuclear loopholes and leakages always remained unattractive to gain the attention of International media. The history of Indian nuclear loopholes is as older as Indian nuclear program itself. Facts and finding in this regard is really alarming. Since 1984 when the horrific incident of Bhopal shook India, till now more than 152 incidents of Uranium leakages took place and this is the number of incidents reported and registered in the police, there must be many which were not reported. Bhopal Gas tragedy was the worst incident where thousands of people in India lost their lives. Forty tons of a deadly toxin called methyl isocyanine leaked from a factory run by US-owned Union Carbide and settled over slums around the plant. It is said that the effects of the gas continue to this day. Those who are crying that Pakistan’s nukes are vulnerable to terrorists perhaps don’t know that Indian nuclear assets are more vulnerable to terrorist and the world should really be worried about the Indian nuclear system, because India has installed all its nuclear facilities and missiles in the Eastern zone in order to keep it utmost away from the striking capabilities of Pakistan. However, the eastern region of India has emerged as the most troubled, fragile and uncontrollable region of the country with a variety of insurgency movements including that of Naxal rebels, the group which has been declared

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530 as a terrorist group. India itself calls its region as “The Red Corridor” due to its instability. Indian nuclear facilities, Uranium processing plant by the name of Uranium Corporation of India Limited (UCIL), Talcher Heavy Water Plant and Institute of Physics (IOP) is located in Nexal guerrillas dominated region of Jharkhand. While Atomic Minerals Directorate for Exploration and Research(AMD), Ceramatic Fuel Fabrication Facility(CFFF), Special Materials Plant are located in Maharashtra which is the hub of Extremist Hindu Militant Groups where Hindutva Brotherhood, Shiv Sena, Bajrang Dal, Durga Vahini and Sangh Parivar like terrorist organizations are well known for their extreme anti-Pakistan policies and are full capable of getting hold of any of the Indian nuclear facility that exists in their respective state and region. As far as the incident of PNS Mehran base incident is concerned, it has been believed by many of our defense analysts in context to facts and figures that it was a plot by CIA and RAW to disseminate Pakistan’s nuclear security issue and defame Pak Army and ISI. Similarly there are many chances that US can edit the videos and cassettes which they got from Osama’s compound in order to open a new front of criticism against Pakistan. Pakistan does not have any security issues regarding its nukes nor it had in past. India and US should be probably more worried who had such incidents in past. Terrorism is a global threat and if nukes are vulnerable to threat then means all the nuclear states stand under this threat. Therefore states should mind their own nukes and should not drool for others ‘crown jewels’! http://pakobserver.net/detailnews.asp?id=98972 (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Ha’aretz Daily – Israel OPINION/Feature 23 June 2011 All Signs Say Iran Is Racing toward a Nuclear Bomb Iran's leadership is undaunted by the sanctions imposed on the country and seems unhindered by the damage the Stuxnet computer worm caused to the centrifuges at the uranium enrichment facility in Natanz. By Yossi Melman VIENNA - The procession of cars carrying Fereidoun Abbasi Davani sped down Vienna's Wagramer Strasse this Monday and into the underground car park of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Outside the building, on the bank of the Danube River, some 30 protesters from the Stop the Bomb movement demonstrated, waving signs denouncing the Iranian nuclear scientist. But Iranian security officers seemed more concerned about the prospect of someone trying to exploit Abbasi Davani's controversial visit to finish the job. On November 29, 2010, anonymous assailants tried to assassinate Abbasi Davani as he emerged from his home in Tehran. He and his wife, seated next to him in the car, were hit by gunfire, but survived the assassination attempt. Iran blamed the Mossad for the failed operation. The assassins were more successful in a different attack launched that same day, which killed another nuclear scientist - Majid Shahriari. The Iranians claimed that Abbasi Davani was nothing but an innocent physics professor. Intelligence sources countered that his university position was just a cover for his secret activity as one of the leading experts in Iran's weaponization, which is working on the final and decisive stage of developing a nuclear weapon under the auspices of the Revolutionary Guards. His name appears on the UN Security Council's blacklist, compiled after the council voted in March 2007 to impose sanctions on companies, organizations and individuals involved in Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs. It also appears on similar lists compiled by the United States and the European Union, which ordered that his assets be frozen.

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

About two months after Abbasi Davani was shot, in January 2011, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad appointed him as his vice president and as head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, a defiant move that seemed to say Iran would continue its nuclear program and no one could stop it. Some two weeks prior to his arrival in Vienna to take part in the IAEA's Ministerial Conference on Nuclear Safety, Abbasi Davani announced that by the end of the year, Iran would triple the amount of uranium it has enriched to a level of 20 percent. Though uranium enriched to this level is intended mostly to fuel Tehran's small nuclear research reactor, which produces medical isotopes, it also bolsters the knowledge of Iranian nuclear experts and their ability to control all stages of enrichment - including to a level of 93%, which enables the production of fissile material used in making a nuclear weapon. This announcement by the head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization was very disturbing to Israel, the United States and other Western countries. It indicates that Iran is determined to continue its nuclear program at full speed and is even accelerating the pace. It means Iran's leadership is undaunted by the sanctions imposed on the country, or by the damage the Stuxnet computer worm caused to the program that operates the centrifuges at the uranium enrichment facility in Natanz. The Stuxnet worm has been ascribed to a sabotage operation undertaken by the Mossad and the CIA. According to foreign sources, it is one of the major achievements of former Mossad head Meir Dagan. In the same announcement, Abbasi Davani said Iran has developed an advanced centrifuge model whose rotors spin at greater speed, thus enabling the enrichment of a larger amount of uranium in a shorter time. Such centrifuges, he said, will be constructed at the second uranium enrichment site that Iran built secretly near the Revolutionary Guards base just outside of Qom. According to the reports of IAEA inspectors who visited it, the site, built deep inside a mountain, looks like a fortified facility made to withstand aerial bombardments. Its existence was revealed in September 2009 thanks to information obtained by the intelligence agencies of Israel, the U.S. and Britain. According to both diplomatic sources in Vienna and intelligence experts, the site at Qom, which contains only 3,000 centrifuges, can only have one goal - enriching uranium for the production of a nuclear weapon. Worrying new questions Two crucial new questions are now worrying all those who follow Iran's nuclear program. One is whether Qom was chosen as a site for uranium enrichment due only to its strategic location, or if any meaning should be attached to the fact that Shi'ites consider it a holy city, the place of residence of Ayatollah Khomeini, founder of the Islamic Republic. Ahmadinejad and several of his ministers, as well as senior commanders in the Revolutionary Guards, belong to a small but influential group in the Iranian government that adheres to a mystical belief in the coming of the Mahdi - the Twelfth, or hidden, Imam - who is considered the Shi'ite messiah. One of the conditions for the Mahdi's coming is that a huge proportion of the world's population be annihilated in a great war. This radical Shi'ite doctrine has parallels in the idea of the War of Gog and Magog in Christian eschatology, which is prophesied to take place in the Jezreel Valley not far from Tel Megiddo (Armageddon in the Greek translation ). Is the site at Qom Ahmadinejad's Armageddon, where a weapon will be developed that will annihilate the unbelievers and hasten the coming of the Messiah? Another cause for concern is an article published about two months ago on a Revolutionary Guards website. In it, for the first time, the author talked about "the day after" Iran carries out a successful nuclear test that would transform it into a nuclear power. Previously, Iranian government officials had always maintained strict silence on this subject. Was the article a fluke, the result of negligence by inattentive censors, or was it written to prepare public opinion, both at home and abroad?

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

It is difficult for a Western rationalist to accept the possibility, even if its likelihood is negligible, that Iran is motivated by religious belief in its determination to obtain a nuclear weapon, and might even use such a weapon for religious reasons. After all, aside from Ahmadinejad's domestic troubles, including calls in parliament for his ouster, the one who decides on sensitive strategic issues like the nuclear one in Iran is not the president, but supreme leader Ali Khamenei, who is not known to have any messianic leanings. But the sum total of all these developments - the appointment of Abbasi Davani, his announcements about the acceleration of enrichment and its transfer to Qom, the unusual article - all these, especially in light of the Arab revolutions that have diverted the world's attention from Tehran, may indicate that Iran is closer to reaching a decision than experts had previously thought. This may also be the background for the outspoken warnings by Dagan, who fears a hasty, reckless decision by the prime and defense ministers to order the Israel Air Force to attack Iran. Yossi Melman is a feature writer and columnist for Haaretz, specializing in strategic issues. He writes about Israel’s intelligence community, nuclear matters, terrorism and other related security issues. http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/features/all-signs-say-iran-is-racing-toward-a-nuclear-bomb-1.369186 (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Issue No. 918, 24 June 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL | Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530