(CUWS) Outreach Journal # 1219

USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies (CUWS) Outreach Journal

CUWS Outreach Journal 1219 10 June 2016

Feature Item: “China’s Nuclear Threat Perceptions.” Authored by Susan Turner Haynes; Published by the Air Force Strategic Studies Quarterly; Volume: 10, Issue: 2, Summer 2016; pages 25-62. http://www.au.af.mil/au/ssq/digital/pdf/Summer16/Haynes.pdf Since the end of the Cold War, China is believed to have doubled the size of its nuclear arsenal, while the other nuclear powers under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) have cut their forces in half. Many analysts explain China’s buildup as a direct response to US missile defense. This article takes a broader view, looking at the threat China perceives from the United States as well as from other nuclear players under the penumbra of US hegemony. A state-by-state analysis provides a multidimensional look at China’s nuclear security environment, allowing deeper insight into the motivations behind China’s modernization.

U.S. Nuclear Weapons 1. US Senate Votes to Keep Stealth Bomber Cost Top-Secret 2. Missile Envy: Modernizing the US ICBM Force

U.S. Counter-WMD 1. China Openly Opposes THAAD 2. US, S. Korea Moving Forward in THAAD Talks: Pentagon 3. US Missile Defense System Aimed only at N. Korea, Iran: White House 4. Moscow Dismisses US Accusations of Severing Missile Defense Dialogue — Diplomat

U.S. Arms Control 1. Obama to Continue Nonproliferation Agenda Through Next Seven Months 2. Russians Violating New START Arms Treaty

Homeland Security/The Americas 1. Ships with Plutonium from Japan Arrive in U.S.

Asia/Pacific 1. Russian Defense Official Warns Against Provocations Next to North Korean Borders 2. North Korea Reactivates Nuclear Weapons Plant, UN Says Citing Satellite Imagery 3. THAAD to 'Dramatically' Enhance Capacity to Counter NK Threat: Defense Chief 4. North Korea Restarts Plutonium Production for Nuclear Bombs: U.S. Official 5. China Tells N. Korea it Wants Denuclearization of Korean Peninsula Issue No.1219, 10 June 2016 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies CUWS Outreach Journal Maxwell AFB, Alabama 6. N. Korea Does Not Stipulate Itself as Nuclear Power in Ruling Party Bylaws 7. N. Korea Sending Soldiers to Middle East Disguised as Civilian Workers

Europe/Russia 1. UK Running 'Secret' Program to Develop Nuclear Weapons 2. Isis Nuclear Attack in Europe Is a Real Threat, Say Experts

Middle East 1. Nuclear Chief: Iran Starts to Supply Heavy Water to US in Coming Weeks 2. Leader Urges ‘Strong Answer’ to US Hostility 3. Russian Envoy: Basic Agreements Made to Purchase Heavy Water from Iran 4. Amano: Iran Fully Committed to JCPOA 5. Commander: IRGC Navy Plans to Develop New Types of Submarines 6. Surplus of Heavy Water Could Stay in Iran: Atomic Energy Organization 7. ISIS Trains 'Scores' of Suicide Bombers for Global Chemical Weapons Attacks – Report 8. No Secrecy in Developing Iran’s Missile Program: IRGC Official 9. FM: General Soleimani in Iraq at Baghdad's Demand

India/Pakistan 1. US Backs India's Bid for Nuclear Group Membership 2. China Leads Resistance to India Joining NSG

Commentary 1. Russia vs. America: A Nuclear Bomber Showdown 2. US-China Strategic Nuclear Terminology: A Primer 3. America’s Nuclear-Deterrence Challenge in Asia 4. Is a Nuclear-Armed Japan Inconceivable?

Return to Top

The Diplomat – Tokyo, Japan US Senate Votes to Keep Stealth Bomber Cost Top-Secret U.S. Senators voted behind closed doors to keep the costs of the U.S. Air Force’s B-21 from the public. By Franz-Stefan Gady June 08, 2016 In May, the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee voted against public disclosure of the contract cost to design and build the U.S. Air Force’s new long-range B-21 stealth bomber due to the fear that revealing the bid value would provide U.S. adversaries with too much information about the aircraft’s capabilities, CQ Roll Call reports. As a result, the contract cost figures can now only be disclosed during classified briefings to the congressional committees dealing with defense issues. “I don’t want to give our enemies information by which they can figure out” details of the bomber’s construction, Senator Bill Nelson told CQ Roll Call. Another senator who voted against public disclosure said that the Pentagon “asserted that disclosure as requested would provide information to our adversaries about the capabilities of the aircraft.” The vote against revealing the bomber costs defeats an effort by the Armed Services Committee Chairman, Senator John McCain, to require the public disclosure of the contract value. “You’re not serving the nation and the taxpayers if they don’t know how much of their taxpayer dollars are being spent,” McCain said during a hearing in March. As I reported previously, McCain also said in February that he would not authorize the new bomber as long as it was procured using a cost-plus contract. “My biggest concern is the cost-plus provision in the contract. I will not stand for cost-plus contracts,” the senator noted. “Somehow the commercial side can do this without a cost-plus contract. It is an evil that has grown and grown and grown over the years, and I will not stand for it on any weapon system.” The contract awarded to U.S. defense contractor Northrup Grumman in October 2015 is divided into two parts: one cost-plus and one firm fixed price. I explained previously (See: “Confirmed: Work on the Pentagon’s Top Secret Bomber to Continue”): The contract awarded [in October] was for the Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) phase, a “cost reimbursable type contract with cost and performance incentives,” (…) at an estimated worth of $21.4 billion in 2010 dollars. The second part of the contract consists of options for the first five production lots to cover the production of the first 21 bombers. The USAF is expected to buy 80 to 100 bombers overall. In current dollars, the price tag for each bomber is estimated at $564 million. (Since few defense analysts expect the Pentagon to buy all 100 aircraft, the per unit cost is very likely to increase.) Fixed-cost contracts, however, have also not succeeded in reducing overall program costs, as a RAND study recently found. The crux of the matter is that at this stage in the process neither Northrup Grumman nor the U.S. Air Force genuinely know how much it will cost to design and build the B-21 stealth bomber, an aircraft with a completely new design that also will incorporate some existing technologies. http://thediplomat.com/2016/06/us-senate-votes-to-keep-stealth-bomber-cost-top-secret/ Return to Top Issue No.1219, 10 June 2016 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies CUWS Outreach Journal Maxwell AFB, Alabama

Defense Industry Daily.com Missile Envy: Modernizing the US ICBM Force By Defense Industry Daily Staff June 08, 2016 June 8/16: The USAF has claimed it is not looking at a road-mobile option for its next-generation intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). Under the Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) program the aging Minuteman III ICBM fleet will be replaced. Speaking about the mobile option, a service official said “We want to make sure that as we look at GBSD, we’re building it modular so if changes need to be made in the weapon system you don’t have to open up, let’s say, the software to redo the entire software.” For 50 years, land-based Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) have been part of the US primary strategic deterrence capability, the nuclear-armed triad that also includes submarine- launched ballistic missiles and long range heavy bombers. Although the main target for the US deterrent – the Soviet Union – imploded in 1991, other threats – such as nuclear-armed rogue states and non-state actors – have emerged. To address these new threats, the US Air Force undertook a major ICBM modernization program. To carry out this program, the USAF awarded a 15-year ICBM Prime Integration Contract (F42610- 98-C-0001) in 1997 to a team led by Northrop Grumman. Since then, the team, which includes Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and ATK, has been carrying out a major modernization of the ICBM system to ensure its readiness. ICBM Prime The ICBM Prime Integration Contract covers modernization of thousands of missile propulsion, guidance, re-entry, and ground system components. The goal is to extend the US Minuteman III ICBM’s life to 2030. Some of the larger programs covered by the contract include:

ICBM Security Modernization Program, which is implementing steps to keep nuclear-tipped ICBMs securely in their silos; Safety Enhanced Re-entry Vehicle (SERV) Program, which is fitting Minuteman III ICBMs with the Mk 21 re-entry vehicle from the decommissioned Peacekeeper missile force – a change that will provide US Strategic Command planners with increased targeting flexibility and enhanced safety; Propulsion Replacement Program, which is remanufacturing motors to replace Minuteman III’s aging propellant to maintain booster reliability; Guidance Replacement Program, which is substituting the NS-50 missile guidance set for aging 1960s vintage guidance electronics, improving flight reliability, system maintainability, and nuclear safety; Propulsion System Rocket Engine Life Extension Program, which is replacing engine components originally produced in the 1970s that had a 10-year design life; Rapid Execution and Combat Targeting Service Life Extension Program, which is updating ICBM command and control capability;

Minuteman Minimum Essential Emergency Communications Network program, which upgraded communications in all Minuteman III launch control centers and also connected these systems to the Milstar satellite communications system; and Improvement to the launch control centers, accomplished through the Environmental Control System program, which is upgrading climate controls to ensure that electronics and ground support systems are maintained at specified pre-set temperatures. https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/missile-envy-modernizing-the-us-icbm-force-06059/ Return to Top

The Korea Times – Seoul, South Korea China Openly Opposes THAAD By Jun Ji-hye June 5, 2016 China repeated its opposition to the possible deployment of a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) battery on the Korean Peninsula, Sunday, claiming that it would destabilize the Asia- Pacific region. "China is opposed to the ongoing U.S. moves to deploy the THAAD system in South Korea," said Adm. Sun Jianguo, China's deputy chief of general staff, at a session of the Asia Security Summit, known also as the Shangri-La Dialogue, in Singapore. "This will erode the security of the region." The summit, which kicked off Friday for a three-day run, is an annual gathering of defense officials in the Asia-Pacific region. "As a soldier myself, I am well aware of the meaning of the deployment," the admiral said in his capacity as China's top representative to the annual security forum. "Deploying THAAD on the Korean Peninsula is an excessive measure that by far exceeds current U.S. defense capabilities." A day earlier, Sun also expressed his country's opposition to the deployment of the missile defense system on the peninsula during a bilateral meeting with South Korean Defense Minister Han Min- koo on the sidelines of the summit. He said it would infringe on China's strategic interests, exposing the deepening bilateral row over the issue once again. In response, Minister Han said, "China is overestimating THAAD. The discussion on deployment originated in a move to defend against North Korea's nuclear and missile threats." Han stressed that THAAD would only be aimed at these. In a speech during a plenary session, Saturday, Han made Seoul's stance clear, saying the country "undoubtedly has the will to allow THAAD deployment." On Feb. 7, hours after North Korea launched a long-range rocket in violation of U.N. resolutions, Seoul and Washington announced their decision to officially discuss deploying THAAD here to better deter nuclear and missile threats from the Kim Jong-un regime. The allies began working-level talks, March 4, to iron out details of deployment such as a possible location.

The Korea Times – Seoul, South Korea US, S. Korea Moving Forward in THAAD Talks: Pentagon June 7, 2016 The United States and South Korea are moving forward in negotiations on the potential deployment of the THAAD missile defense system in the South, and are now focused on working out unspecified "complicated issues," the Pentagon said Monday. Following the North's long-range missile test in February, Seoul and Washington launched official talks about placing a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense battery in the South to bolster defense against missile threats from the communist nation. The move has irked China, which claims the powerful THAAD radar can be used to spy on it. The issue has drawn renewed attention after a senior U.S. official was quoted as saying last week that there will be a "public announcement soon." The remark was seen as meaning that the two sides are close to agreement on THAAD deployment. "Those alliance negotiations continue and my understanding is they are proceeding as planned and we are working through the complicated issues that need to be worked out before that deployment can move forward," Pentagon press secretary Peter Cook said at a press briefing. Cook said, however, that the issue did not come up when Defense Secretary Ash Carter held talks with South Korean Defense Minister Han Min-koo in Singapore on the sidelines of the annual regional defense ministers' meeting called the Shangri-La Dialogue. "There were extensive discussions with the South Koreans over a range of issues. That specific issue did not come up," Cook said. "So a range of topics with regard to the U.S.-South Korea alliance and strong defense relationship. But specifically, the topic of THAAD negotiations did not come up." Issue No.1219, 10 June 2016 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies (CUWS) Outreach Journal

In Seoul, government sources said that the THAAD talks have moved forward to a point where the two sides are now looking into multiple candidate sites for deployment, including not only existing U.S. military bases, but also mountainous areas away from cities. Speculation has it that the two sides could announce deployment during October's defense ministers' talks. Meanwhile, Defense Minister Han said in an interview with CNN that THAAD's deployment will "dramatically" enhance Seoul's capacity to counter North Korea's missile threats. "South Korea only has the capacity to intercept missiles at its terminal phase. So we have limitations. If THAAD is deployed to U.S. forces in Korea, our capability will be dramatically enhanced. There are definite military benefits to this," Han said in the interview broadcast Monday morning. (Yonhap) http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2016/06/205_206385.html Return to Top

The Yonhap News – Seoul, South Korea US Missile Defense System Aimed only at N. Korea, Iran: White House By Chang Jae-soon June 8, 2016 WASHINGTON, June 7 (Yonhap) -- The U.S. missile defense system is designed to counter "limited attacks from Iran and North Korea" and are not aimed at the strategic deterrence forces of Russia and China, the White House said Tuesday. The White House Office of Management and Budget made the point in a policy statement, expressing opposition to a proposal to remove the word "limited" from a section of the National Missile Defense Act of 1999 that says the U.S. policy is to deploy "an effective National Missile Defense system capable of defending ... against limited ballistic missile attack." The proposal to strike the word was in next year's defense budget bill introduced to the Senate. "The administration appreciates the Committee's continued support for the Nation's ballistic missile defense programs. However, the Administration strongly objects to section 1665, which would amend section 2 of the National Missile Defense Act of 1999 by striking 'limited,'" the White House said. "The inclusion of this word is specifically intended to convey that the U.S. homeland missile defense system is designed and deployed to counter limited attacks (in number and sophistication) from Iran and North Korea, and not to counter the strategic deterrence forces of Russia and China," it said. The office also said the administration continues to believe that the most reliable and effective means to deter major nuclear powers from ever contemplating an attack on the United States is "by maintaining a modern and robust strategic nuclear deterrent force." China and Russia have expressed concern about the U.S. desire to deploy the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile defense system to South Korea, saying the system can be used

TASS Russian News Agency – Moscow, Russia Moscow Dismisses US Accusations of Severing Missile Defense Dialogue — Diplomat The Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman says the Pentagon in May categorically turned down any possibility of issuing legal guarantees that its missile defense systems are not targeted against Russia June 10, 2016 MOSCOW, June 10. /TASS/. Moscow dismisses the United States’ accusations of severing dialogue on missile defense systems, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharovs said on Friday. "I am speaking about constant accusations that Moscow was the one to stop dialogue on missile defense systems. It is not true," she said. "It was the United States to withdraw from the Anti- Ballistic Missile Treaty back in 2001." "In May 2016, Pentagon once again categorically turned down any possibility of issuing legal guarantees that its missile defense systems are not targeted against Russia," she said. "Concurrently, it named Russia among the most serious threats to the United States." "Russia has never closed the door to dialogue [with the United States on missile defense - TASS]," Zakharova stressed. "Meaningful dialogue in this format, in particular on missile defense, has been completely rolled back by the West which is led by the United States." "The American side is aware of these facts and circumstances [of severing the missile defense dialogue - TASS]. We don’t understand where this striving to shift responsibility created by Washington on us stem from. It looks at least strange," she said. "These actions are meant to gloss over the results of the foreign policy activities of the outgoing U.S. administration which has only aggravated problems in the area of missile defense rather than solved them," the Russian diplomat underscored. http://tass.ru/en/politics/881369 Return to Top

Sputnik International – Russian Information Agency Obama to Continue Nonproliferation Agenda Through Next Seven Months President Barack Obama will continue his administration’s efforts to reduce the threat of nuclear nonproliferation during his last seven months in office, White House Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes said on Monday. 7 June 2016 WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — In the coming seven months, the administration will be reviewing the US nuclear modernization plan, a multi-decade effort to upgrade the US land, sea, and air strategic deterrent. Early during his first term in office, Obama announced his intent to pursue "a world without nuclear weapons" at a landmark nonproliferation speech in the Czech Republic. "I can promise you today that President [Barack] Obama is continuing to review a number of ways he can advance the Prague [nuclear disarmament] agenda over the course of the next seven months," Rhodes said at the annual Arms Control Association meeting. In the years that followed, the Obama administration negotiated the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty — or New START — with Russia, and worked with international partners to ensure Iran’s nuclear program is used solely for peaceful purposes. Until President Obama leaves office in January 2017, the administration will continue to take steps to address the threat of North Korea’s nuclear program, which Rhodes characterized as "the most serious proliferation challenge we face in the world today." Missile defense in Southeast Asia will also be a "top priority" in Obama’s final months in office, according to Rhodes. The White House is less confident about making progress on further reductions in deployed and non-deployed nuclear warheads, given Russia’s "reduced enthusiasm" for new negotiations, Rhodes explained. The White House also estimates the US Senate will not ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, banning any nuclear test for military or other purposes. However, Rhodes would not comment on possible cuts to the modernization program, but said that changes to the program "are not closed to us." The United States will have to make a "significant investment" in its nuclear enterprise, Rhodes stated, but identified possible offsets, given the improvements made to US conventional capabilities and the Obama administration's decreased emphasis on the role of nuclear weapons in US strategy. The US disarmament community, including former government officials, have raised the possibility of removing certain programs from the US modernization program, including the long-range standoff nuclear cruise missile, or the Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent, the intercontinental ballistic missile to replace the Minuteman III. Cuts to the program could significantly reduce the estimated $1 trillion price-tag on the thirty-year modernization program. http://sputniknews.com/us/20160606/1040896983/obama-nonproliferation-agenda.html Return to Top

The Washington Free Beacon – Washington, D.C. Russians Violating New START Arms Treaty Moscow tried to deceive inspectors on missile cuts, U.S. says By Bill Gertz June 9, 2016 U.S. nuclear arms inspectors recently discovered that Russia is violating the New START arms treaty by improperly eliminating SS-25 mobile missiles, American defense officials said. The violations were discovered during an on-site inspection carried out in Russia in April, said officials familiar with details of the inspection. During the recent visit to a Russian missile base, U.S. technicians found critical components of SS- 25s—road-mobile, intercontinental ballistic missiles—had been unbolted instead of cut to permanently disable the components. Additionally, American inspectors were unable to verify missiles slated for elimination had been destroyed. Instead, only missile launch canisters were inspected. As a result, inspectors were unable to determine if the missiles were properly eliminated as required by the 2010 arms treaty, the officials said. Additionally, the inspectors found that Russian missile forces had improperly displayed missile components slated for destruction by failing to leave them in the open for monitoring by so-called national technical means of verification, a euphemism for spy satellites and other sensors used in monitoring arms accords. On-site inspectors also reported they were unable to verify that Russia had completed all New START treaty cuts to launchers declared eliminated by Russia between 2011 and 2015. “Russia will meet their treaty elimination goals by using empty launchers from retired and retiring missile systems,” said one official. “They’re basically cutting up launchers that don’t carry missiles anyway.” Disclosure of the New START treaty violations is a further setback for the Obama administration’s arms control agenda. The administration has made arms agreements with Russian aimed at cutting nuclear forces a priority. Arms talks have been suspended since Moscow militarily annexed Ukraine’s Crimea in 2014. Asked about the April verification problems, State Department arms verification bureau spokesman Blake Narenda declined to discuss the matter, citing treaty secrecy rules. “The New START treaty forbids releasing to the public data and information obtained during implementation of the treaty,” Narenda said in a statement. “This would include any discussion of the results of inspection activities undertaken by the United States or the Russian Federation,” he said. “However, both sides continue to implement the treaty in a businesslike manner.” On Capitol Hill, House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mac Thornberry said the potential New START verification problem highlights the larger issue of the Obama administration’s poor record in pressing Russia to abide by its treaty obligations.

“Whether it’s Russian violations of the Open Skies Treaty, the Biological and Chemical Weapons Conventions, or multiple violations of the INF treaty, this administration has proven singularly unconcerned with arms control compliance,” Thornberry told the Free Beacon. “Never having been made to pay a price, why wouldn’t Putin conclude that violations of the New START treaty would go unpunished as well?” he said. Mark Schneider, a former Pentagon strategic nuclear policymaker, said the New START arms accord has serious verification shortcomings. “The New START treaty is a verification disaster area and Russia has a long history of violating substantive and verification provisions of strategic arms control agreements,” said Schneider, a senior analyst at the National Institute for Public Policy. Schneider, former Pentagon director for strategic arms control policy, said Russia has avoided complying with its treaty commitments. “They have violated all of the major arms control treaties and will continue to do so because we impose no penalties,” he said. New START provisions for eliminating solid-fuel missiles like the SS-25 call for crushing the first stage rocket motor or cutting it in two equal parts. “If Russia has not done this, the missiles would not have been removed from accountability,” Schneider said. “The requirement for cutting, crushing, or flattening is intended to prevent the reuse of the rocket motor casings to produce new missiles. There is no other reason to violate this provision of New START, except perhaps to sell them to rogue states.” Schneider said the elimination procedures for New START are less stringent than under the earlier START accord that allowed inspectors to witness the elimination of all mobile ICBMs. “This is not the case under New START,” he said. “For solid-fuel ICBMs, including mobile ICBMs, inspectors do not have the opportunity to observe eliminations. Instead, they are allowed to view a portion of the remains from eliminations.” Mobile launchers under New START also are eliminated by cutting erector-launchers, leveling supports, and mountings from the mobile chassis and removing launch support equipment, including instruments. Also, Russia is required under the treaty to display old mobile launchers for spy satellites to verify their elimination and to permit U.S. inspectors to verify the missile destruction within 30 days. The Obama administration’s record for responding to arms cheating by Russia is weak. The State Department, which is in charge of monitoring treaty compliance, hid Moscow’s violation of the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty for several years to avoid upsetting its arms control agenda. The INF violation was finally made public in 2014 after prodding from Congress in a State Department report that said the violation involved Russia’s development of illegal ground-launched cruise missiles. According to the State Department web site, there have been four “Type 2” on-site inspections since February under New START. Type 2 inspections are those used for confirming missile eliminations like those used for the SS-25. The location of the April treaty inspection could not be learned.

The Japan Times – Tokyo, Japan Ships with Plutonium from Japan Arrive in U.S. By Eric Johnston, Staff Writer June 7, 2016 OSAKA – Two ships loaded with plutonium and highly enriched uranium from the Japan Atomic Energy Agency’s Fast Critical Assembly reactor arrived Tuesday at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Savannah River Site near Aiken, South Carolina. The British-flagged Pacific Egret and Pacific Heron were carrying 331 kg of weapon-usable plutonium. About 236 kg, used for nuclear-reactor testing in Japan, originated in the United Kingdom, while around 93 kg is of U.S. origin and 3 kg is of French origin, according to Savannah River Site Watch, a nongovernmental organization tracking the shipment. The two ships, which are usually used to transport spent nuclear fuel between Japan and Europe for reprocessing, departed the village of Tokai, Ibaraki Prefecture, in March and were originally expected to reach their destination last month. Their impending arrival had been the subject of heated debate in South Carolina, with that state’s governor, Nikki Haley, in March demanding in a letter to Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz that the shipment be turned back or sent elsewhere. In April, the U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration announced that the plutonium, already en route from Japan, will be disposed of at a nuclear waste repository in New Mexico after being processed at the Savannah River Site facility. Savannah River Site Watch Director Tom Clements said in a statement Tuesday that the arrival of the ships appeared to have been delayed for security reasons. “The removal of the material from Japan represents a significant accomplishment in our broader global nuclear security efforts to secure highly enriched uranium and plutonium worldwide,” Lt. Gen. Frank G. Klotz, Under Secretary for Nuclear Security and a National Nuclear Security Administration official, said in a statement after the ships had arrived. “Japan has been one of the United States’ staunchest allies in the global effort to minimize and, when possible, eliminate the use of sensitive nuclear materials at research facilities.” The plutonium material will first be prepared for disposition at the Savannah River Site and will sent for eventual disposal to a facility near Carlsbad, New Mexico. The highly enriched uranium from Japan will be sent to separate storage facilities in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and will be turned into low enriched uranium. The nuclear material has been returned to the U.S. under a deal struck between Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and U.S. President Barack Obama in 2014, and reaffirmed at the 2016 Nuclear Security Summit. At the beginning of 2015, Japan’s total stockpile of plutonium generated by its nuclear power plants was estimated at about 47.8 tons, of which about 10.8 tons was in Japan. The rest was stored in France and the United Kingdom, where it had been sent for reprocessing.

TASS Russian News Agency – Moscow, Russia Russian Defense Official Warns Against Provocations Next to North Korean Borders "The situation may only aggravate," the deputy defense minister said June 05, 2016 SINGAPORE, June 5. /TASS/. Russia’s Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov warned against provocations and emotional actions next to the North Korean border. He made the statement at the Shangri-La Dialogue 15th Asia Security Summit on Sunday. He said "it is not correct to undertake any emotional actions very close to the DPRK border, do not provoke them." "The situation may only aggravate," the deputy defense minister said. At the same time, he said Russia "cannot accept the DPRK’s nuclear missile ambitions." "We support fully all resolutions of the UN Security Council on this issue." "Russia will do everything possible to have Pyongyang join the non-proliferation agreement, a country free from nuclear weapons," he said confirming "the Sextet format does not work." "The only remaining opportunity for us is to continue positive pressure on the government of the DPRK in non-proliferation and on the nuclear program," the official said. Russia is against excessive military reaction to DPRK’s actions The situation in the Korean peninsula is a source of serious concern but there should not be any "excessive military reaction" to Pyongyang’s actions, Antonov said. Russia, in his words, "pursues a consistent policy of defending the non-proliferation regime and of not recognizing the nuclear ambitions of the DPRK." "At the same time, we stand against the excessive reaction to Pyongyang’s actions and consider it impossible to use the North Korean rocket and missile programs as a pretext for upsetting the military and political balance in the region," Antonov said.

He added that the talk was about creating new areas for deploying the elements of the U.S. global missile defense system. "Such short-sighted steps can turn around in consequences, which will be destructive for the whole region. All the efforts should be proportionate to the real threats," Antonov said. The situation in the Korean peninsula aggravated after the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) had conducted a nuclear test on January 6. On February 7, the DPRK launched a carrier rocket with an artificial Earth satellite in violation of the U.N. Security Council decisions. In response, the U.N. Security Council unanimously adopted a resolution on toughening sanctions against North Korea. In February, Seoul and Washington agreed to start official consultations on possible deployment of the US THAAD system for intercepting short-range and medium-range ballistic missiles in the south of the Korean peninsula. Problems for Russia and for China The U.S. missile shield causes problems both for Russia and for China, Antonov told. Moscow "has called on it to stop implementation of the plans, offered many times the cooperation, offered solutions to settle the situation," he said, however "we did not manage to persuade them to continue the dialogue on the matter, and as far as I understand, now is not the best time for them to have consultations." "Russia has never claimed to be against any anti-missile programs, every country has the right to work on any weapons, of course, with the exception for the nuclear, chemical or biological weapons," the deputy defense minister said. "However, it is most dangerous, where one country provides its security at expense of security of others.". http://tass.ru/en/world/880171 Return to Top

RT (Russia Today) North Korea Reactivates Nuclear Weapons Plant, UN Says Citing Satellite Imagery 6 June 2016 North Korea has apparently reactivated its reactor in Yongbyon, some 90km north of Pyongyang, which is used to reprocess plutonium that could be used in nuclear weapons. It was once central to the North’s atomic weapons drive, a UN watchdog says. “There are indications the reprocessing plant at Yongbyon has been reactivated,” a spokesman of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said on Monday, as quoted by Reuters. The information obtained by the IAEA refers to “activities related to the five-megawatt reactor, expansion of enrichment facilities and activities related to (plutonium) reprocessing,” the IAEA head Yukiya Amano said on the same day during a quarterly IAEA Board of Governors meeting, AFP reported.

Issue No.1219, 10 June 2016 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies CUWS Outreach Journal Maxwell AFB, Alabama The UN watchdog has no access to North Korea and monitors its activities by satellite. The organization said that the satellites spotted the “movement of vehicles, steam and discharge of warm waters or transport of material" at the main reactor complex in Yongbyon. “However, as we do not have inspectors on the ground we are only observing through satellite imagery. We cannot say for sure. But we have indications of certain activities through the satellite imagery,” Amano told journalists at a news conference in Vienna. At the same time, Amano did not say when the activities spotted by the satellite occurred. Last week, experts from the US-Korea Institute at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, US, said that two rail "flatcars" loaded with casks potentially containing chemicals for reprocessing were spotted near the Yongbyon complex's radiochemical laboratory. The experts also cited satellite data. Exhaust plumes were seen coming from the lab's thermal plant and coal pens near the plant appeared filled to capacity, AFP reported, citing a statement from the institute. According to the statement, a lack of activity and steam generation at the Yongbyon main reactor indicated that it had either been shut down or had been operating at a low level. It also suggested that North Korea may have been extracting spent fuel for reprocessing as it requires that the reactor be stopped. In February, James Clapper, the director of US National Intelligence, warned that North Koreans could start reprocessing plutonium from Yongbyon main reactor’s spent fuel “within a matter of weeks to months.” He also informed the US Senate Armed Services Committee that Pyongyang had expanded its uranium enrichment facility at the site. The Yongbyon reactor was shut down in 2007 but, in 2013, Pyongyang started renovating it after its third nuclear test. In September 2015, the North said that Yongbyon was operating in order to improve the "quality and quantity" of its nuclear weapons, as reported by Reuters. The IAEA also reported the resumption of activity at Yongbyon’s main reactor in 2015. In May, the US-Korea Institute at Johns Hopkins University presented satellite images showing that Pyongyang may be preparing for a new nuclear test. The images were captured on May 5 and show what it is said to be the command center close to the Punggye-ri detonation site in the north of the country. Pyongyang conducted its fourth nuclear test on January 6 and subsequently launched a long-range rocket carrying an earth observation satellite on February 7. These moves provoked a wave of harsh criticism from the international community with the UN significantly expanding the existing sanctions imposed on North Korea in March by banning all exports that might benefit its operational capabilities. In March, North Korea also escalated the already tense situation on the peninsula by claiming it would resort to “a preemptive and offensive nuclear strike” against the US and South Korea if provoked. The statement was made ahead of the joint US-South Korean military drills that were held from March 7 to April 30. In May, however, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un said that his country will seek to normalize relations with “hostile” nations and would not resort to the use of nuclear weapons unless the country’s sovereignty was challenged. https://www.rt.com/news/345616-north-korea-reactivates-nuclear/ Return to Top

Yonhap News Agency – Seoul, South Korea THAAD to 'Dramatically' Enhance Capacity to Counter NK Threat: Defense Chief June 7, 2016 WASHINGTON/SEOUL, June 6 (Yonhap) -- South Korea's defense chief said the possible deployment of a U.S. advanced missile defense system to South Korean soil will help "dramatically" enhance Seoul's capacity to counter North Korea's missile threats. Seoul and Washington have been discussing the potential deployment of a Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) battery in the South, where about 28,500 American troops are stationed, in an effort to better defend against growing missile threats from the communist nation. "South Korea only has the capacity to intercept missiles at its terminal phase. So we have limitations. If THAAD is deployed to U.S. forces in Korea, our capability will be dramatically enhanced. There are definite military benefits to this," Defense Minister Han Min-koo said in an interview with CNN. Han spoke in Singapore, where he attended the annual regional defense ministers' meeting. The so- called Shangri-La Dialogue highlighted a deepening row between South Korea and China over THAAD as China has explicitly expressed its opposition to Washington's move to deploy it to the South. Han said the North has sharply increased missile tests since leader Kim Jong-un came to power, conducting 25 tests in his four-year rule, compared with 18 tests carried out when his father and late leader Kim Jong-un was in power for 18 years. "We assess Kim Jong-un is still in the process of establishing his leadership and influence," Han said. The minister also said the North's leader is "rash" and "impulsive." "Kim Jong-un was just 27 when he came to power with very little time to prepare. Add to that, he's very young. He lacks experience and he has a rash and impulsive character. We are very concerned," he said. Han said South Korea believes the North's nuclear warhead miniaturization capability has advanced to a great degree, but added that there is no solid evidence that the North has actually achieved it. Asked whether he believes the North is capable of putting a nuclear warhead on to a missile, Han said, "At this point, our assessment is we don't believe they can." Should North Korea continue to make progress in its miniaturization technology, however, Han said that it may be possible for the North to deliver it "in other ways, such as an artillery shell or in the form of a nuclear mine."

The Japan Times – Tokyo, Japan North Korea Restarts Plutonium Production for Nuclear Bombs: U.S. Official By Matt Spetalnick, Reuters June 8, 2016 WASHINGTON – North Korea has restarted production of plutonium fuel, a senior U.S. State Department official said Tuesday, showing that it plans to pursue its nuclear weapons program in defiance of international sanctions. The U.S. assessment came a day after the U.N. nuclear watchdog said it had “indications” that Pyongyang has reactivated a plant to recover plutonium from spent reactor fuel at Nyongbyon, its main nuclear complex. The latest developments suggest North Korea’s reclusive regime is working to ensure a steady supply of materials for its drive to build warheads, despite tightened international sanctions after its fourth nuclear test in January. The U.S. official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said that Washington is worried by the new plutonium reprocessing effort, but he offered no explicit word on any U.S. response. “Everything in North Korea is a cause for concern,” the official said. “They take the spent fuel from the 5 megawatt reactor at Nyongbyon and let it cool and then take it to the reprocessing facility, and that’s where they’ve obtained the plutonium for their previous nuclear tests. So they are repeating that process,” the official said. “That’s what they’re doing.” North Korea, which conducted its fourth nuclear test in January, vowed in 2013 to restart all nuclear facilities, including the main reactor and the smaller plant at Nyongbyon, which was shut down in 2007 as part of an international disarmament-for-aid deal that later collapsed. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which has no access to North Korea and mainly monitors its activities by satellite, said last year it had seen signs of a resumption of activity at Nyongbyon. IAEA chief Yukiya Amano told a news conference in Vienna on Monday that there have been indications of renewed plutonium reprocessing activities at Nyongbyon. Reprocessing involves extracting plutonium from spent reactor fuel, one route to obtaining bomb fuel other than uranium enrichment. “I would agree that there are indications,” the U.S. official said. The official declined to confirm whether this determination was made from satellite imagery or intelligence sources, or to say how much plutonium North Korea could produce by this method.

South Korea’s Unification Ministry spokesman Cheong Joon-hee said Seoul was closely watching movements related to the North’s nuclear facility “with grave concern” but declined to comment directly on plutonium production. North Korea announced at a rare congress of its ruling Workers’ Party last month that it would strengthen its defensive nuclear weapons capability. It had already declared itself “a responsible nuclear weapons state” and disavowed the use of nuclear weapons unless its sovereignty is first infringed by others with nuclear arms. While North Korea in the past has often obtained key components for its nuclear program from other countries despite international sanctions, there was no sign of any recent outside procurement involved in reactivating its plutonium reprocessing, the U.S. official said. There is little proven knowledge about the quantities of weapons-grade uranium or plutonium that North Korea possesses, or its ability to produce either, though plutonium from spent fuel at Nyongbyon is widely believed to have been used in its nuclear bombs. South Korea’s Defence Minister Han Min-koo said last month the North probably had about 40 kilograms (88 pounds) of plutonium. That would be enough to make eight to 10 bombs, according to experts. Operating the 5 megawatt reactor could yield about 5-6 kg of plutonium a year, they said. Experts at the U.S.-Korea Institute at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies in Washington predicted last year that North Korea’s nuclear weapons stockpile could grow to 20, 50 or 100 bombs within five years, from an estimated 10 to 16 weapons at that time. North Korea has come under tightening international pressure over its nuclear weapons program, including tougher U.N. sanctions adopted in March backed by its lone major ally China, following its most recent nuclear blast and ballistic missile tests. The website 38 North reported last week, based on commercial satellite imagery, that exhaust plumes had been detected twice in May from the thermal plant at Nyongbyon’s Radiochemical Laboratory, the site’s main reprocessing installation. The Institute for Science and International Security also reported exhaust emissions from a chimney at the plant, which it said was often associated with reprocessing activities there. http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2016/06/08/asia-pacific/north-korea-restarts-plutonium- production-nuclear-bombs-u-s-official/#.V1imibTFtmA Return to Top

Yonhap News Agency – Seoul, South Korea China Tells N. Korea it Wants Denuclearization of Korean Peninsula By Kim Deok-hyun June 9, 2016 BEIJING, June 8 (Yonhap) -- China told a North Korean delegation last week that it wants to realize the goal of denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula, South Korea's top nuclear envoy said Wednesday after meeting with his Chinese counterpart.

The Korea Herald – Seoul, South Korea N. Korea Does Not Stipulate Itself as Nuclear Power in Ruling Party Bylaws June 10, 2016 SEOUL, June 10 -- North Korea did not stipulate itself as a nuclear-armed state in its recently revised set of ruling party bylaws, an analysis of the document showed Friday, spawning speculation that Pyongyang has left open the possibility of negotiations over its denuclearization. Yonhap News Agency analyzed the 52-page document after having recently obtained it. The analysis found no reference to the communist state as a nuclear power contrary to widespread expectation. The set of party bylaws, which is regarded as being superior to the Constitution in the party-centric state, was amended during the 7th party congress last month, in what analysts said was a move to further strengthen North Korean leader Kim Jong-un's grip on power. Issue No.1219, 10 June 2016 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies (CUWS) Outreach Journal

Kim Yong-hyun, a North Korea expert at Dongguk University, noted that Pyongyang might have signaled its intention to engage in negotiations over its nuclear program amid its deepening isolation stemming from its nuclear and missile provocations. "If North Korea had stated itself as a nuclear power in the bylaws, this would have posed a great impediment to its efforts to hold talks and negotiations with the United States (over its nuclear program)," he said. Pyongyang has already claimed itself to be a nuclear power in its Constitution. During the May party congress, the reclusive state went further to portray itself as a "responsible" nuclear state, saying that it will "permanently" defend its policy of simultaneously pursuing economic development and nuclear armament. All these moves have been seen as an indication of Pyongyang's unwillingness to bargain away its nuclear arms despite its pressing need to break out of international isolation and shore up its debilitated economy. Observers have argued that with Pyongyang having conducted four nuclear tests in 2006, 2009, 2013 and this year, it would seek negotiations over a nuclear arms reduction rather than denuclearization. In the revised document of party regulations, the North described its current leader as a "great leader," bringing the status of the 30-something strongman closer to that of his two late predecessors: national founder Kim Il-sung and former leader Kim Jong-il. Kim Il-sung is the current leader’s grandfather, while Kim Jong-il is his father. The North calls Kim's predecessors "eternal leader" and "eternal head," respectively. The document also said that citizens age 18 or older can join the party and are obliged to offer it 2 percent of their monthly income, and that party membership can be canceled when a member opposes the party's policy, engages in any factional activity or inflicts "grave" damage on the party. The set of rules, in addition, defined the ruling party as one rooted in the ideological principles of Kim's two predecessors, in an apparent move to justify the long-standing hereditary rule by the Kim family. (Yonhap) http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20160610000730 Return to Top

The Korea Times – Seoul, South Korea N. Korea Sending Soldiers to Middle East Disguised as Civilian Workers June 10, 2016 North Korea has been sending active duty soldiers to Middle East countries by disguising them as civilian laborers, as the reclusive country tries to earn foreign currency, a U.S.-based media outlet said Friday. Quoting sources in the Middle East, the Radio Free Asia (RFA) added that the North Korean authorities seem to let the soldiers grow out their hair to look more like civilians.

Sputnik International – Russian Information Agency UK Running 'Secret' Program to Develop Nuclear Weapons 7 June 2016 A new report claims Britain's Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) is 'secretly' working on a program to upgrade the current UK Trident warhead to give it more destructive power, despite the country's long-term commitment to reduce nuclear proliferation. According to the Nuclear Information Service (NIS) — an independent body which works to promote public awareness and foster debate on nuclear disarmament — AWE is currently working on a program to upgrade the current UK Trident warhead to the 'Mark 4A' modified warhead, which will have increased accuracy and destructive power and an extended lifetime. "Parliament has never been formally notified of the Mark 4A modification program and the costs and timetable for the program have never been disclosed. Nevertheless, the policy of successive UK governments has been to achieve a world without nuclear weapons, so it is incontrovertible that at some point in the future nuclear weapons production and maintenance at AWE must cease," its latest report says. Transparency? In May 2010, the government announced that it would reduce the overall size of the UK's nuclear weapons stockpile to 225. A government statement, updated in May 2015, stated: "Following a further review, in October 2010 the Prime Minister announced that by the mid-2020s the overall size of the UK nuclear weapons stockpile will reduce to no more than 180 warheads. Issue No.1219, 10 June 2016 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies (CUWS) Outreach Journal

No more than 120 will be operationally available." However, critics say that a reduction in the number of warheads, but with increased "destructive power," is hardly in the spirit of non-nuclear proliferation. "Parliament should debate whether to replace the UK Trident warhead, given the questions over its necessity, cost, proliferation implications, and impact on the UK's nuclear disarmament obligations," the NIS report says. Professor Martin Rees (Lord Rees of Ludlow), Astronomer Royal and a former President of the Royal Society, in the foreword to the report says: "[There is] a need for AWE, a highly expensive institution, to be more politically accountable and more transparent. Parallel US institutions like Los Alamos are in a less 'closed' world; to a greater extent than at AWE their staff attend mainstream scientific conferences and contribute research on non- classified topics." According to the report, the program involves close collaboration with the US nuclear weapons laboratories through a joint US/UK Joint Re-entry System Working Group, and key components for the modified warhead are purchased from the US. A senior staff engineer at Lockheed Martin in California is responsible for planning, coordinating, and executing the development and production of 'UK Trident Mk4A Re-entry Systems' as part of the 'UK Trident Weapon System Life Extension Program'. http://sputniknews.com/europe/20160607/1040916158/uk-trident-nuclear-proliferation.html Return to Top

The Independent – London, U.K. Isis Nuclear Attack in Europe Is a Real Threat, Say Experts International think-tank on proliferation warns that a possible ‘dirty-bomb’ attack on a Western capital is ‘high’ By Kim Sengupta, Amsterdam Wednesday, 8 June 2016 The threat of a terrorist attack using nuclear material is the highest since the end of the Cold War, with Isis actively trying to acquire weapons of mass destruction, according to a leading international think-tank on proliferation. “Isis has already carried out numerous chemical weapons attacks in Syria; we know it wants to go further by carrying out a nuclear attack in the heart of Europe. This, combined with poor levels of security at a host of nuclear research centres in the former Soviet Union mean the threat of a possible ‘dirty-bomb’ attack on a Western capital is high,” said Moshe Kantor, the president of the desInternational Luxembourg Forum. The warning from the organisation, whose members include former government ministers and senior officials from Russia and the West, comes amid deep apprehension that jihadists will attempt to carry out atrocities during the impending Euro 2016 football championship in France. The forum is not suggesting that a terrorist nuclear attack is likely tmayo take place during the tournament,

Issue No.1219, 10 June 2016 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies CUWS Outreach Journal Maxwell AFB, Alabama but Dr Kantor pointed out that the Islamist cell which carried out the Brussels attacks two months ago were believed to be monitoring workers and security arrangements at a Belgian nuclear facility. “Their previous documented attempts to gain access to a nuclear power station in Belgium are evidence of their intent,” he stated at an international conference in Amsterdam. “The terrorists don’t necessarily have to use a 'dirty bomb'. We are not just talking about stolen nuclear material, using conventional explosives in a nuclear plant, such as smuggling in a bomb, would have catastrophic consequences.” Former British defence secretary Des Browne, a member of the forum and vice-chairman of the Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI), said the threat of nuclear terrorism was a highly significant and complex issue which needed a unified international response. “It shouldn’t be a surprise that if terrorists get hold of nuclear material they will try to use it, we also know that they are seeking such material, there were reports, for example, of Isis getting hold of uranium isotopes when they captured Mosul,” he said. “It isn’t that hard to build a ‘dirty bomb’. They may not kill that many people with such a bomb, but the effect on the environment, the infrastructure and the psychological impact on people would be devastating. They can also use cyber warfare to target a nuclear facility.” The meeting in Amsterdam marks the 30th anniversary of the Reykjavik summit between US President Ronald Regan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev which paved the way for a historic missile treaty between the US and the Soviet Union. It comes after a nuclear conference hosted by President Barack Obama in Washington earlier this year which focused on the threat of a terrorist attack using nuclear material by Isis and other extremist groups following the Paris and Brussels attacks. The President’s deputy national security adviser, Ben Rhodes, said: “We know that terrorist organisations have the desire to get access to these raw materials and to have a nuclear device.” Around 2,000 metric tons of highly enriched uranium and separated plutonium, that is being used internationally in civilian and military programmes, could be turned into a nuclear bomb if stolen or diverted, said the White House. But fewer than half of the 50 countries attending the summit had even agreed to secure their sources of radiological material. President Vladimir Putin refused to attend the Washington meeting with the Kremlin claiming it was an American attempt to take over the system of securing radioactive material. It was revealed last autumn that four attempts by Russian-linked gangs in Moldova, a former Soviet state, to sell nuclear material to terrorists, including Isis, has been foiled. Evidence laid before the courts by Moldovan authorities showed that the smugglers had tried to exploit a breakdown in cooperation between Russia and the West on security issues. Pakistani President Nawaz Sharif also cancelled his Washington visit after an Islamist terrorist bombing killed 72 people. His country, which has a nuclear arsenal, and figures in the military and security establishment that are sympathetic to jihadists, is viewed by analyst as a prime source for a terrorist device. President Obama had repeatedly stressed the danger of nuclear terrorism and his emphasis on nuclear disarmament was an important factor in him winning the Nobel peace prize. Months into his presidency, he said in a much publicised speech in Prague that nuclear weapons were “the most dangerous legacy of the Cold War”. But in Amsterdam, Dr Kantor held that the current impasse on nuclear arms control was due to the stance of Washington. “The United States’ refusal to discuss limits for its missile defence programme is a bottleneck for talks, which impedes the entire process of controlling nuclear Issue No.1219, 10 June 2016 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies (CUWS) Outreach Journal

weapons and heightens the threat of a nuclear incident. If we take the matter seriously, there should be no ’sacred cows’ either among defensive or offensive weapons,” he argued. In a video message to the conference, Mr Gorbachev, said: “We cannot be satisfied with the current situation, the window to a nuclear-free world first opened in Reykjavik, is being shut and locked before our eyes...The danger of nuclear weapons proliferation has grown to a large extent for this reason.” http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/isis-nuclear-attack-in-europe-is-a-real- threat-say-experts-a7069891.html Return to Top

FARS News Agency – Tehran, Iran Sunday, June 05, 2016 Nuclear Chief: Iran Starts to Supply Heavy Water to US in Coming Weeks TEHRAN (FNA) - Head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) Ali Akbar Salehi announced that Tehran is preparing to send a cargo of heavy water to the US within the next few weeks. "Some talks have been underway, but the money hasn’t yet been deposited and when the money is deposited (by the US), we will send the heavy water too," Salehi told FNA on Sunday. "The heavy water supply is still in storage (in Oman) and God willing, when we receive the money, we will supply it," he added. "The job will be done within the next few weeks," Salehi underlined. Noting that negotiations with Russia over selling 40 tons of heavy water are still underway, he said, "European firms have also contacted us (to purchase heavy water from Iran) and we are on the verge of negotiations." His remarks came after AEOI Spokesman Behrouz Kamalvandi announced that the Organization is holding talks with other countries to sell them its excess heavy water. "We are in talks with several states to sell them the surplus of Iran's heavy water," Kamalvandi told reporters on Friday. He, meantime, pointed to the US purchase of Iran's excessive heavy water, and said, "We have asked US to make some commitments about the purchase of the heavy water; fortunately, they are being fulfilled and we are now at the stage of materializing (transferring) it." In late May, Salehi had announced that several European states have shown interest in purchasing heavy water supplies from Iran, adding that the modern heavy water reactor in Arak will be launched in five years. "We are due to sell 32 tons of heavy water to the US and we made the conditions a little harder after the (US) seizure of $2bln of Iran's assets and they (the Americans) should first pay the money. In addition to that, we are in talks with the Russians to sell 40 tons of heavy water to them," Salehi said, addressing a ceremony to start construction of buildings to produce stable isotopes in the Central province of Qom.

Press TV – Tehran, Iran Leader Urges ‘Strong Answer’ to US Hostility Sunday, June 5, 2016 Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei says Iran has to respond strongly to “totally hostile behavior” of the US government and its Congress. The Leader told members of Iran’s new parliament in Tehran Sunday that US policies and its threats against Iran have not changed after a nuclear deal reached with Tehran in July. “The Americans, whether the government, Congress and presidential candidates, constantly make excessive demands and threats,” Ayatollah Khamenei said. “Their stances and threats at this moment are the same as before. We shouldn’t remain silent towards these insults,” said the Leader “Against the insolence of the enemies, there is need to come to the scene and shut their mouths with a strong answer,” he added. In its political agenda, the Leader said, “the enemy makes its calculations according to the reactions and if it senses any passivity and retreat from the opposite side, it will not settle for less and will ask for more.” Iran has come under new US pressure since the conclusion of nuclear talks, with the American government imposing new sanctions on the country over its missile program and demanding that Tehran restrict it. Ayatollah Khamenei also warned of enemy plots to trigger an internal strife, urging Iranian lawmakers to neutralize them. “The enemy is trying to activate ethnic, ideological and partisan faultlines and turn them into an earthquake. Hence, members of Majlis must try to foil this scheme.” Issue No.1219, 10 June 2016 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies (CUWS) Outreach Journal

'Specific plots' Ayatollah Khamenei also touched on “the enemy’s specific plots for the important and sensitive West Asian region,” saying Iran is seen as the only obstacle to their realization. “The presence of Islam and Muslims, massive oil resources and waterways as well as the Zionist regime have made this region very important to the enemy,” he said. “Their plan for the region is what they cited as the ‘new Middle East’ and a ‘greater Middle East’ several years ago,” the Leader added. American plans in the region, including in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and the Palestinians territories, have not realized due to Iran’s resistance, the Leader said. “There is need to stand up to hegemonic policies and unmask the arrogance.” Economy, Iran's main issue Ayatollah Khamenei also said Iran’s primary problem is its economy, for which the country should find a solution. The Leader has already asked state officials to work on developing an “economy of resistance” in the face of foreign restrictions, centered on domestic production. “We have to look at every government move in the field of economy and see which part it lies in the chart of the 'economy of resistance',” he said. The government has seen a steady trickle of foreign delegations into Iran since the country reached a nuclear agreement in July, but critics say the deal has had little dividends so far. Ayatollah Khamenei said, “Economy is the main issue in the country and we have to solve it.” “Domestic production is the cure for recession while creating jobs is important,” said the Leader. “The shame this humble body of mine feels on seeing an unemployed youth go home empty handed is no less than his,” he added. http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2016/06/05/469015/Iran-Leader-economy-lawmakers- economy-of-resistance Return to Top

FARS News Agency – Tehran, Iran Monday, June 06, 2016 Russian Envoy: Basic Agreements Made to Purchase Heavy Water from Iran June 6, 2016 TEHRAN (FNA) - Russian Ambassador to Tehran Levan Jagarian announced that his country has reached preliminary agreements with Iran on the purchase of 40 tons of heavy water. "Basic agreements have been made in this regard and the details, including the financial and technical details which are complicated, should be discussed," Jagarian told FNA in Tehran on Sunday on the sidelines of Russia's National Day. "Negotiations still continue," he added. Issue No.1219, 10 June 2016 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies CUWS Outreach Journal Maxwell AFB, Alabama In relevant remarks in May, Head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) Ali Akbar Salehi said that "we are in talks with the Russians to sell 40 tons of heavy water to them". Iran has turned into an exporter of heavy water to foreign states. Salehi said on Sunday that Tehran was preparing to send a cargo of heavy water to the US within the next few weeks. "Some talks have been underway, but the money hasn’t yet been deposited and when the money is deposited (by the US), we will send the heavy water too," Salehi told FNA. "The heavy water supply is still in storage (in Oman) and God willing, when we receive the money, we will supply it," he added. "The job will be done within the next few weeks," Salehi underlined. Noting that negotiations with Russia over selling 40 tons of heavy water are still underway, he said, "European firms have also contacted us (to purchase heavy water from Iran) and we are on the verge of negotiations." His remarks came after AEOI Spokesman Behrouz Kamalvandi announced that the Organization is holding talks with other countries to sell them its excess heavy water. "We are in talks with several states to sell them the surplus of Iran's heavy water," Kamalvandi told reporters on Friday. http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13950317000331 Return to Top

Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA) – Tehran, Iran 6 June 2016 Amano: Iran Fully Committed to JCPOA Vienna, June 6, IRNA - Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Yukiya Amano said here on Monday that Iran is fully committed to implement the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) under the United Nations Security Council Resolution 2231. The International Atomic Energy Agency Board of Governors seasonal meeting started in Vienna on Monday. During the meeting, the issues regarding the endorsement of Iranian nuclear issues would be discussed based on the UNSC resolution 2231. As per the agreement clinched between Tehran and the P5+1, Iran nuclear dossier came out of the UNSC agenda and the anti-Iran sanctions also revoked. http://www.irna.ir/en/News/82102665/ Return to Top

FARS News Agency – Tehran, Iran Monday, June 06, 2016 Commander: IRGC Navy Plans to Develop New Types of Submarines TEHRAN (FNA) - Commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps Navy Rear Admiral Ali Fadavi announced that the IRGC is working on new types of submarines different from the normal ones used by the US and Russia. "Monitoring the subsurface doesn’t necessarily need having subsurface vessels and there are different ways to do it and we are after them too and have been successful and are working on them," Fadavi told FNA on Monday. "On the other side, building submarines is among the IRGC Navy's plans but not the normal submarines existing in the world based on what the US and the Russians have defined; principally, the IRGC is after presenting a new theory and definition for naval power," he added. His remarks came after a university student in Iran presented a plan to build an Unmanned Underwater Vehicle (UUV) with the capability of tracking mines and firing torpedoes. The plan presented by a student at the IRGC's Imam Hossein (AS) University in Tehran was revealed in a TV report last month. The student explained that the plan, which seems to be in the preliminary stages, includes manufacturing of an unmanned submarine (sometimes known as underwater drone) capable of discovering mines and firing torpedoes. Iran has made huge progress in building different subsurface vessels and equipping them with the state-of-the-art weapons. In relevant remarks in November, Iranian Navy Commander Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari announced that the country's submarines have been equipped with the capability to fire home- made long-range Qadir cruise missiles. "The missiles that we are using today are good and proper missiles to fulfill different missions, including coast-to-sea or surface-to-surface missions, or to be fired from a vessel or by submarines," Sayyari said, addressing a ceremony to mark delivery of a large number of high- precision and long-range Qadir cruise missiles from the defense ministry to the Navy. His comments came one month after he announced that the advanced Valfajr torpedoes whose mass-production started in October had been mounted on the country's home-made submarines. "Valfajr torpedo is now used by the Navy units in operations," Sayyari told FNA in Tehran at the time. "The torpedo is just fired from submarines and the Navy's Tareq class and Qadir class submarines are equipped with the torpedo," he added. http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13950317000673 Return to Top

RT (Russia Today) – Moscow, Russia ISIS Trains 'Scores' of Suicide Bombers for Global Chemical Weapons Attacks – Report 7 June 2016 Islamic State could carry out chemical weapons attacks in any part of the world, a Kurdish military source has said, as cited by Iranian media. Various international organizations have previously warned of the possibility of such terror acts. A large number of Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) militants have already been trained for suicide attacks with chemical bombs, Iranian FARS News Agency (FNA) reported a general within the Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG) as saying. "ISIL has equipped its terrorists with chemical bombs to use them in a suicide attack in Iraq, Syria or any other country," General Akram Mohammad Abdulrahman said. Claiming that "scores of youngsters" have been instructed to be part of such attacks, he added that "both explosive and chemical material" might be "simultaneously" used by the terrorists. It's not the first time IS and its affiliated groups have been linked to possession of chemical weapons. In April, the head of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), Ahmet Uzumcu, said the intergovernmental watchdog was "extremely worried" that terrorist groups in the Middle East might be developing such explosives. Saying that the OPCW had discovered evidence suggesting that sulfur mustard chemical agent had been used in attacks in Syria and Iraq, Uzumcu added that "there are strong suspicions" the weapons might have been used and produced by Islamic State. "It proves that they have the technology, know- how and also access to the materials which might be used for the production of chemical weapons," the OPCW director general said. Earlier this year, Russia's Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said the threat of weapons of mass destruction falling into the hands of non-government groups is widely recognized, warning that

Tasnim News Agency – Tehran, Iran No Secrecy in Developing Iran’s Missile Program: IRGC Official June 09, 2016 TEHRAN (Tasnim) – A lieutenant commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) made it clear that the country does not need to keep anything in the dark about development of its missile industry. Speaking to the Tasnim News Agency, General Hossein Nejat, the IRGC lieutenant commander for cultural affairs, underlined that the country’s missile program will both continue to be expanded and made public according to the grand strategies set by the General Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces. He also urged the administration to demonstrate power and not give in to the United States’ excessive demands. In late March, Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei underscored the need for boosting Iran’s defense capabilities, warning that enemies are making use of every tool available to undermine the Islamic Republic. Ayatollah Khamenei said at the time that if the Islamic establishment seeks technology and negotiations but lacks defense might, it will have to buckle in the face of any weak country that poses threat to it. http://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/2016/06/09/1100378/no-secrecy-in-developing-iran-s- missile-program-irgc-official Return to Top

Issue No.1219, 10 June 2016 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies CUWS Outreach Journal Maxwell AFB, Alabama FARS News Agency – Tehran, Iran Friday. June 10, 2016 FM: General Soleimani in Iraq at Baghdad's Demand TEHRAN (FNA) - Iraqi Foreign Minister Ebrahim al-Jafari underlined that Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Quds Force Commander Major General Qassem Soleimani is in Iraq to help the country in campaign against terrorism after receiving Baghdad's rigid request. "General Soleimani is in Iraq at the invitation of the Iraqi government to provide military counseling to the Iraqi forces," the Arabic-language Sumeria news channel quoted al-Jafari as saying. In relevant remarks last Sunday, Hashd al-Shaabi (volunteer forces) Commander Abu Mehdi al- Mohandes underlined that General Soleimani is helping the Iraqi forces in their campaign against terrorism upon a request by the Iraqi government. "The Iranian advisors, headed by dear brother Qassem Soleimani, have been beside us since the start of war and his presence has happened upon the demand of the Iraqi government and agreement of the Armed Forces' top commander," Mohandes said in an interview with Sumeria news channel. He, meantime, said that the Iraqi nation is able to kick the terrorists out of Iraq with the possibilities in their hands now, adding that Hashd al-Shaabi doesn’t have any political plan and merely supports the political process. In relevant remarks earlier, a representative of Hashd al-Shaabi appreciated Iran and General Soleimani for assisting his country in the campaign against terrorism and safeguarding its territorial integrity. "We were surrounded in Samarra and had lost everything but this brave commander (General Soleimani) came to our help with all his forces and broke the siege," Seyed Hamid Hosseini said, addressing the Shiite pilgrims in the Central city of Qom. "If the Islamic Republic of Iran and its leader didn’t help us, I say very explicitly that no Iraq wound exist today," he added. Iran is providing Iraq and Syria with military advisory and humanitarian aid in their fight against terrorist groups. General Soleimani said in March that Takfiri terrorism threatens all Muslims, and Iran has waged war on those terrorists that trade enslaved women and children. "The fire of Takfiri and Takfirism has engulfed in homes of our Sunni brothers. Those behind this are under the illusion that they can bring Shiism and the Islamic Republic to their knees. More than anywhere else, Takfiri groups have targeted the sanctity of humanity and the Sunni world," General Soleimani said, addressing a ceremony in Tehran. General Soleimani then asked those behind the smear campaign to question Iran's policy in its ongoing war on terror, "Is it adventurism if the Islamic Republic makes sacrifices to defend Muslims? Is it wrong for the Islamic Republic to battle a group that in just one region is buying and selling some 20,000 unfortunate enslaved young women? Is it wrong for the Islamic Republic to stand against the anti-Muslim current and stop the demolition of Mosques and Muslim holy sites?"

His remarks came after Iraqi Minister of Human Rights Mohammed Mahdi Ameen al-Bayati said the Takfiri ISIL terrorist group has sold more than 5,000 women and girls merely from Iraq’s Izadi Kurdish minority in their slave market. http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13950321000582 Return to Top

The Economic Times – Mumbai, India US Backs India's Bid for Nuclear Group Membership By Press Trust of India (PTI) 7 June 2016 WASHINGTON: Backing India 's bid to join the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), the US has said by becoming the member of the elite grouping the country would be in a stronger position to be a "good citizen" on proliferation- related issues. "Having gone down the path of the civil nuclear agreement with India, and having invested a significant amount of time in building up our cooperation with India as it relates to nuclear security," Deputy National Security Advisor Benjamin Rhodes told a Washington audience. Rhodes remarks on India came in response to a question about why some countries like China are opposing India's membership in the 48-member NSG. "..I think the bottom line for us is that we believe that through engagement with India and through engagement with groups like the NSG, we are in a better position to support India as a good citizen on these issues," Rhodes said. He said the US believed that engaging India and trying to bring it into international processes will be more effective in promoting the country's security protocols. "And frankly, it takes place against continued conversations that we have with India about their approach to nuclear weapons; and of course, the support that we've always expressed for diplomatic efforts between India and Pakistan," Rhodes said in response to a question at an event organised by the Arms Control Association. Based in Washington, Arms Control Association is a think-tank that had opposed India-US civil nuclear deal and is now opposing India's membership to the NSG. Rhodes remarks on India came in response to a question on India about why some countries are opposing India's membership to NSG. "So, I think the bottom line for us is that we believe that through engagement with India and through engagement with groups like the NSG, we are in a better position to support India as a good citizen on these issues going forward," Rhodes said. "Of course, we'll take seriously the concerns of other nations, but again for us I think this is part of a broader context where we've decided to take this approach with India. And we've seen it bear some fruit, particularly on issues related to nuclear security," he said.

The Hindu – Chennai, India China Leads Resistance to India Joining NSG Reuters June 9, 2016 Vienna -- China is leading opposition to a push by the United States and other major powers for India to join the main club of countries controlling access to sensitive nuclear technology, diplomats said on Thursday as the group discussed India's membership bid. Other countries opposing Indian membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) include New Zealand, Ireland, Turkey, South Africa and Austria, they said. The 48-nation NSG aims to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons by restricting the sale of items that can be used to make those arms. Opponents argue that granting it membership would further undermine efforts to prevent proliferation. It would also infuriate India's rival Pakistan, which responded to India's membership bid with one of its own and has the backing of its close ally China. “By bringing India on board, it's a slap in the face of the entire non-proliferation regime,” a diplomatic source from one of a handful of countries resisting India's push said on condition of anonymity. A decision on Indian membership is not expected before an NSG plenary meeting in Seoul on June 20, but diplomats said Washington had been pressuring hold-outs, and Thursday's closed-door meeting was a chance to see how strong opposition is. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry wrote to members asking them “not to block consensus on Indian admission to the NSG” in a letter seen by Reuters and dated Friday. China, however, showed no sign of backing down from its opposition to India joining unless Pakistan becomes a member. “China, if anything, is hardening [its position],” another diplomat said. Most of the hold-outs oppose the idea of admitting a non-NPT state such as India and argue that if it is to be admitted, it should be under criteria that apply equally to all states rather than under a “tailor-made” solution for a U.S. ally.

Mexico's president, on Wednesday, said his country supports India's membership bid. http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/china-leads-resistance-to-india-joining-nuclear- export-club/article8709967.ece Return to Top

The National Interest – Washington, D.C. OPINION/Feature Russia vs. America: A Nuclear Bomber Showdown Who wins? By Leonid Nersisyan June 3, 2016 In the previous articles “These Russian Nukes Are Better Than America’s” and “U.S. vs Russia: Struggling for Undersea Nuclear Supremacy” we reviewed the strategic nuclear balance between Russia and the United States in the context of land- and submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), respectively. We have also examined in detail the issue of the total number of strategic carriers andbased nuclear intercontinental warheads in ballistic the arsenals missiles of these (IСBMs) countries and their compliance with the New Start Treaty, which reduces the number of carriers to seven hundred and the number of warheads to 1,550. In this article, we will address the last component of nuclear forces left: strategic bombers. In the U.S. and Russian arsenals, bombers make the least share of strategic nuclear forces—5.5 percent of the warheads owned by Washington (eighty-five bombers, each equaling one warhead according to the New Start Treaty) and around 3 percent of those owned by Russia (approximately fifty bombers in service). At first sight this is a very small share representing no significant contribution. Nevertheless, there is a “but”: although a strategic bomber is accounted for one warhead, in reality it carries many more. For example, the Russian Tu-160 “White Swan” (NATO reporting name: Blackjack) can carry up to twelve strategic cruise missiles with nuclear warheads; therefore, the real capacity of strategic bombers is not accurately expressed on paper. In general, though, they have both pros and

of attack direction, the ability to change a combat mission in flight and the ability to use nonnuclear precisioncons over weaponsIСBMs. Among in local the and advantages regional conflicts. of bombers, As for one the can main mention drawback, a significant one can unpredictability name lower action speed during a strike-back— -start preparation at most, which is not the case for aviation. On the other hand, when there are several aircraft on alert in the sky, it is almost impossible to moderndestroy IСBMsthem with require a preventive five minutes strike for over pre the “home” territory. However, from a technical point of view, the interception of a bomber or cruise missile is currently more feasible than effective missile defense. Let us now turn our attention to the parties’ strategic aviation in more detail, and compare the efficiency of their current weapons.

Issue No.1219, 10 June 2016 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies CUWS Outreach Journal Maxwell AFB, Alabama The United States: A “Ghost” Without Missiles and the “Good Old” B-52 According to U.S. Department of State data, as of January 1, 2016, there are currently twelve B-2 Spirit and seventy-three B-52H Stratofortress bombers on alert. There is yet another bomber, which was earlier classified as strategic—the B-1B Lancer—however, the aircraft had no possibility of carrying nuclear weapons and has been excluded from the list, for reasons we will discuss below. Let us begin with the B-52H, which, despite its great age (the equipment currently in service was manufactured in the 1960s, so it is already over fifty years old) remains practically the only carrier of strategic cruise missiles in the U.S. Army. I am talking about AGM-86B ALCM missiles, whose air range is more than 2,400 kilometers. There are also precision nonnuclear modifications of these missiles in service, which hit their targets at a distance of up to 1,200 kilometers. This makes the B- 52 the main nuclear deterrence aircraft. As for the B-2 Spirit, the plane is the most high-tech and expensive bomber in the world. These aircraft were first put in service as early as 1994. A total of twenty-one vehicles were issued, followed by the end of production—the enormous price took its toll. Accounting for the design costs, the price of one B-2 is a fantastic $2.1 billion. For this money the United States obtained a Stealth vehicle with one of the lowest radar cross-section parameters (RCS); the lower this parameter is, the less conspicuous an object is for hostile radars. Moreover, there is some indirect information indicating that the RCS of the huge B-2 is lower than that of the small F-22 and F-35 Stealth fighters. Originally, this was planned to be used to enter a hostile air defense area for attack. However, modern Russian radars are able to detect targets of this type—lower observability only reduces the distance of detection, but does not exclude it completely. Given the fact that B-2s are equipped with free-fall nuclear bombs only, and carry no strategic cruise missiles, an effective deep attack on an opponent such as Russia seems extremely unlikely. For example, the Russian S-400 surface-to-air missile system detects “ordinary” targets at distances of up to six hundred kilometers. Even if the same B-2 is “seen” at a distance of only two hundred or one hundred kilometers, it will not manage to drop bombs in time. Contemporary and modernized fighters such as the Su-30SM, Su-35S and MiG-31BM can also be involved in pursuing “ghosts.” It is this fact that makes the B-2 a somewhat awkward aircraft: despite its record price, its actual role in a hypothetical global nuclear conflict would negligible. The aircraft is more suitable (and often used) for nonnuclear attacks in local conflicts. Finally, a few words on the B-1B Lancer. This bomber, looking much like the Russian Tu-160 on the outside, did not come out as originally planned. It reaches no practically significant supersonic speeds; its highest possible speed is 1.25 Mach (i.e., 25 percent faster than the speed of sound). AGM-69 SRAM missiles, which were possible to carry by aircraft until 1990 (before they were removed from production), flew for only 160 kilometers, which was beyond any comparison with Soviet cruise missiles. Later, the aircraft carried nuclear free-fall bombs, subsequently not being able to carry nuclear weapons at all, and so being removed from the strategic weapons list. This is the reason why the B-1B is missing from the New Start Treaty lists. Nevertheless, it would be possible to return nuclear bombs onboard the aircraft if wished—this would hardly require serious modifications. Except another matter is that free-fall bombs are not easy to carry deep into Russian and Chinese territory, even for the B-2, let alone the B-1, for which doing so would be virtually impossible. Speaking of prospects, a new strategic bomber is currently being developed as part of the Long Range Strike Bomber Program (LRS-B). A rough concept of the aircraft was revealed on February 27, 2016, by U.S. Secretary of the Air Force Deborah Lee James. The bomber, which received the identification B-21, will be built in the Flying Wing scheme, just like the B-2. The main requirements for the aircraft are even higher radar stealthiness and an adequate cost (the planned price per

aircraft so far is $564 million). Northrop Grumman will receive a total of $80 billion for the development and production of one hundred new bombers. Production will start in the mid-2020s, at the earliest. The B-21 will have to replace the whole B-52H and B-1B fleet. The new bomber, apparently, will carry the advanced cruise missiles developed as part of the LRSO (long-range standoff weapon) program. Real information on when this weapon will be designed and which characteristics it will have is still absent. The “White Swan” and the “Bear” Carry the Most Sophisticated Strategic Cruise Missiles Like with the United States, the Russian equipment currently in service includes two types of strategic bombers— - -160 “White Swan” (NATO reporting name: Blackjack). the Тu 95МS (NATO reporting name: Bear) and the Тu - -95 was put into USSR service as long ago as 1956. However, the early versions of the aircraft have all since been discarded. The modernizedLet us look at “Bears,” the Тu now95МS in first. the RussianThe basic service, version were of the issued Тu during the period from 1981–92, that is, they are much “younger” than American B-52s. There are a total of sixty-four aircraft of this type, although around half of them are apparently in storage, with about thirty to thirty-five vehicles in service. The main Tu-95 weapon is the Kh-55SM cruise missile, with a maximum launch range of 3,500 kilometers. Moreover, the bomber’s modernization to the level of the Tu-95MSM (up to thirty-five vehicles) has started. The modernized missile carriers are able to use the latest Kh- 101/102 cruise missiles, with nonnuclear or nuclear payloads, respectively. The new missile has advanced and unequalled characteristics: its maximum air range is 5,500 kilometers and filigree precision, and its circular error probable (CEP) is just five meters. Also, the missile is created with radar stealth technology. The nonnuclear Kh-101 has already been successfully applied in field conditions, in the Syrian conflict. Tu-95 carries eight cruise missiles, either Kh-55 or Kh-101/102. After modernization, the aircraft will serve for long enough, at least until the 2030s. The most sophisticated Russian strategic bomber is the Tu-160. Presently, the Russian Air Force includes sixteen aircraft of this type. Its maximum flight speed is much higher than that of its American “twin” the B-1B, at 1.6 Mach. Moreover, the Tu-160 carries twelve strategic cruise missiles in its inner compartments. The same cruise missiles are used as on the Tu-95MS: the Kh-55 and the latest Kh-101/Kh-102. Aircraft of this type have started to undergo some modernization— they are receiving new equipment that allows for the use of precision nonnuclear weapons. Also, production renewal works for the “White Swan” are currently being performed, with deep modernization to the level of the Tu-160M2. The updated vehicle will have a completely new electronic “filling” and far exceed its predecessor’s abilities. The precise number of aircraft planned for construction is unknown so far, but there has been talk of fifty vehicles. Production, according to plan, will start in 2023. As for the project of the new PAK-DA bomber (Prospective Aviation Complex for Long-Range Aviation), following the decision on the renewal of Tu-160 production, the terms of project implementation have become very vague: earlier, its first flight was planned for 2025, which now seems unlikely. The aircraft concept has not been revealed, but most likely it will be a subsonic stealthy missile carrier resembling the American LRS-B. Conclusions From a quantitative perspective, U.S. strategic aviation has a certain advantage over Russia’s. However, American aircraft are currently equipped noticeably more poorly: the operational range of the Russian Kh-101/Kh-102 cruise missiles already in service exceed their American analogues

Issue No.1219, 10 June 2016 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies CUWS Outreach Journal Maxwell AFB, Alabama more than twice over, which guarantees that the Russian bombers will blow off their entire payload, from a secure distance, on any opponent. Nevertheless, shooting down a B-52H carrying an AGM-86B ALCM is a very uneasy task just as well. Besides, a B-2 carrying no cruise missiles could hardly realize its potential in a real global nuclear war, despite the fact that the platform itself is the most sophisticated in the world. As for the further prospects, the B-21 program has just started, and it is unclear so far which difficulties it will face and whether it will be implemented in full. The same is true of the Russian PAK-DA project: the future of both vehicles is still vague. That cannot be said about Tu-160M2, whose start of production may not be easy, but is still feasible. Given the level Russian designers have achieved in the field of strategic cruise missiles, the profoundly modernized Tu-160 with its weapons will be able to fulfill its nuclear deterrence function for decades, as well as take part in local conflicts as necessary. Strategic Nuclear Deterrence Will Persist For the Foreseeable Future Now, let us briefly sum up the results of our series of articles on each of the components of the United States and Russia’s strategic nuclear weapons. As far as we have understood, with its mobile launching platforms and more advanced antimissile defense penetration systems, closely approaching the creation of a maneuvering hypersonic warhead, Russia has a noticeable advantage over the United States in the field of land-based ICBMs. This, among others, may also be due to the fact that the United States withdrew from the Anti- Ballistic Missile Treaty and has begun to actively develop this type of weapons, forcing Russia to respond asymmetrically to the forming threat. As for submarines with SLBMs, the United States currently has more balanced forces in this area, due to the application of the Ohio-class nuclear submarines with highly reliable Trident II missiles. Nevertheless, Russia has managed to be the first to create a strategic nuclear submarine of the fourth generation; three Project 955 Borei submarines are already in service. Therefore, for some time before the United States has designed the Ohio replacement—SSBN(X)—the situation may be brought to balance or move to the Russian side altogether. Strategic aviation has been discussed above. Its role in the implementation of nuclear deterrence is weaker than that of ICBMs and SLBMs, although it still occupies its niche. Today, one may speak of a situation close to parity in this area. Summing up all the above, we may come to the only conclusion: nuclear weapon is still playing its main, positive role of deterring the world from global wars. What is more, the situation is not going to change in the foreseeable perspective—each step of the parties is followed by a quick response. Thus, as long as the United States develops its antimissile defense, Russia is going to develop ICBMs and warheads likely to penetrate this antimissile defense. The only beneficiaries in such a situation are weapons manufacturers, who will always have good financing. Therefore, all speculations and statements on the issue of nuclear war are either propagandistic or destructive—people simply do not understand what they are talking about. Leonid Nersisyan is a military columnist for the REGNUM information agency (regnum.ru), Moscow, Russia. http://nationalinterest.org/feature/russia-vs-america-nuclear-bomber-showdown- 16460?page=show Return to Top

The Diplomat – Tokyo, Japan OPINION/Asia Defense US-China Strategic Nuclear Terminology: A Primer Experts discuss the U.S.-China nuclear calculus. By Ben Lowsen June 07, 2016 During a discussion at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace on May 5, Tsinghua professor Li Bin characterized existing U.S.-China nuclear dialogues as “difficult and inefficient, in part because of differences in the ways that Americans and Chinese think about nuclear weapons.” To alleviate such misunderstandings and establish a common language for exchange, the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (P5) have undertaken a survey of relevant vocabulary to produce a nuclear glossary under China’s leadership. Although some see this effort as a distraction, U.S. Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Rose Gottemoeller and Li agree that it is a necessary step to deepen mutual understanding in a potentially dangerous area. You can find what appears to be the UN’s official Glossary of Key Nuclear Terms here. Published by the China Atomic Energy Press, the Glossary focuses on technical vocabulary concerning nuclear arms control and disarmament, testing and monitoring, material production, non-proliferation, energy, and safety and security. Although the Glossary contains precise definitions of key technical concepts in each of these fields, Li pointed out a number of general terms not found in the Glossary that are critical to understanding divergences between Chinese and U.S. thinking: Deterrence vs. compellence: Deterrence means using nuclear weapons to maintain the status quo while compellence means using them to change it. Li noted that because large conflicts always spring out of smaller conflicts, it may not be practically possible to distinguish the difference, for example if one side launched a conventional attack and the other side used the nuclear threat to deter it. Arms race: Each side building its arsenal in response to the other, leading to a feedback loop that increases the rate of arms acquisition, casts a cloud over diplomatic relations, and threatens strategic stability. Li explains that China sees an arms race a competition to gain global hegemony, as when the United States and USSR built up their nuclear arsenals. Senior U.S. nuclear strategist Linton Brooks noted that, unlike during the Cold War, the United States is not seeking superiority over a specific opponent, but rather to prevent other actors from gaining hegemony themselves. Threats vs. security challenges: According to Li, the United States considers an actor to be a threat when it possesses both the capability and intent to harm the United States. China on the other hand views any potentially dangerous situation as a security challenge. This is not necessarily limited to foreign opponents but also includes issues like internal corruption and U.S. arms sales to Taiwan. Li points to the U.S. nuclear penetrator warhead is an example of the two countries’ divergence in perceptions: the United States believes it poses no a threat because it is a response to the North Korean threat and sized accordingly, posing no direct threat to China. China believes it lowers the bar for the use of nuclear weapons, thereby harming China’s security and constituting a security

The Wall Street Journal – New York, NY OPINION/Commentary America’s Nuclear-Deterrence Challenge in Asia The NATO playbook can help keep South Korea and Japan from pursuing bombs of their own. By EVAN BRADEN MONTGOMERY June 7, 2016 In the shadow of the Hiroshima Peace Memorial, U.S. President Barack Obama spoke recently about the danger of nuclear proliferation and the dream of a world without nuclear weapons. To arrest the spread of such weapons, however, the United States may need to reinforce its nuclear- deterrence commitments in East Asia, where both South Korea and Japan could face mounting pressure to go nuclear. Two trends are raising the odds that U.S. allies might rethink their commitment to nonproliferation. A nuclear-armed North Korea has become a more serious threat to South Korea, Japan and the U.S., and this threat will only increase as Pyongyang builds more weapons and better missiles to deliver them. Meanwhile, China’s modernization of its military is turning the tables on Japan, which was once the stronger power. By fielding a variety of weapons systems that could deny the U.S. access to the Western Pacific in case of a conflict, Beijing is also making it much more difficult for Washington to defend its ally. To this point, South Korea and Japan have been content to take shelter under the U.S. nuclear umbrella. But Seoul may soon start to fear that the U.S. could be sidelined during a crisis, especially if U.S. territory falls within missile range of the North Korean nuclear arsenal. Tokyo may similarly conclude that a small arsenal of its own is the only way to offset a deteriorating military balance, particularly if Washington’s posture in the region becomes increasingly vulnerable. Should either neighbor begin to seriously explore the nuclear option, the other would be much more likely to follow suit. The U.S. nuclear umbrella could thus begin to fray. Nuclear proliferation would lead to greater volatility in one of the world’s most strategically and economically vital areas. With the addition of South Korea and Japan, East Asia would become home to five nuclear powers (including Russia) with a variety of historical grievances and contemporary disputes, any of which might provide the spark that sets off a crisis.

How might Washington head off this possibility? One option is to take a page from NATO’s playbook and share the roles, risks and responsibilities of nuclear operations with its allies in East Asia. During the Cold War, Europe was doubtful the U.S. would use nuclear weapons to defend the Continent, as that would mean risking nuclear retaliation from the Soviet Union. To enhance the credibility of the U.S. nuclear umbrella, NATO developed mechanisms that coupled America to its partners. These included the Nuclear Planning Group, which allowed any alliance member to participate in high-level discussions on nuclear issues. Even more important, nuclear-sharing arrangements permitted select alliance members to host U.S. nuclear weapons on their territory and to employ them with U.S. authorization. These mechanisms not only enhanced deterrence against the Soviet Union. They also convinced allies such as West Germany to forgo their own nuclear weapons and rely on the U.S. instead. Both of these institutions are still in place today. But similar structures have never existed in South Korea and Japan, where the U.S. once based nuclear weapons but always kept them in its own hands. That might need to change if U.S. allies in East Asia begin to seriously consider acquiring nuclear weapons. If Seoul and Tokyo had a clearer window into how the U.S. intended to conduct nuclear operations, and a direct role in those operations at least under certain conditions, then both might be willing to forgo nuclear weapons programs of their own. Paving the way for upgraded extended-deterrence relationships will require thinking through a number of complex issues. For instance, while it might be tempting to pursue trilateral mechanisms that more clearly mimic those in NATO and could bind South Korea and Japan more closely together, lingering tensions between these two neighbors, along with differences in their threat perceptions, probably mean that bilateral mechanisms would be best. And should it prove too difficult politically for these allies to store nuclear weapons on their territory, the U.S. could consider a neutral location such as the island of Guam, where U.S. nuclear weapons have been kept in the past and where South Korean and Japanese forces could be deployed when necessary. Finally, the U.S. will need to preserve and eventually replace those tactical nuclear weapons it still retains, which have coupled Washington to its allies in Europe and might eventually play a similar role in East Asia. The growing military challenges posed by North Korea and China will unavoidably demand a response in East Asia. The question is whether America can reassure its allies in the region with its nuclear umbrella—or whether it will leave its friends to fend for themselves and risk further proliferation. Mr. Montgomery is a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. http://www.wsj.com/articles/americas-nuclear-deterrence-challenge-in-asia-1465318715 Return to Top

Issue No.1219, 10 June 2016 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538 USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies CUWS Outreach Journal Maxwell AFB, Alabama War on the Rocks.com – U.S. OPINION/Article Is a Nuclear-Armed Japan Inconceivable? By Rupal N. Mehta June 9, 2016 Would it be better for the United States if Japan had nuclear weapons? That is what Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump suggested, contrary to nearly seventy years of U.S foreign policy, that a nuclear Japan would be preferable. In an interview with The New York Times, he stated, “you have, probably, North Korea has them…And, would I rather have North Korea have them with Japan sitting there having them also? You may very well be better off if that’s the case.” This week, in an interview with CBS News, Trump stated, when asked if he had reversed his position on Japanese defense, “maybe they will, maybe they won’t.” Is Trump right? Is a nuclear Japan feasible or even desirable? In Japan, the reply has been a firm no. In response to Trump’s comments, Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida stated, “it is impossible that Japan will arm itself with nuclear weapons.” In unpacking this statement, we are provided with half of the answer to these questions. As the only country that has had nuclear weapons used against it, Japan has generally foregone overt militarization and has focused on providing national security, overseas peace-keeping operations, and disaster relief. In my recent discussions with Japanese officials, military officers, and civilians it is clear that Japan, unlike some of its counterparts in East Asia, view the acquisition of nuclear weapons extremely unfavorably. This was highlighted during President Obama’s recent visit to Hiroshima where Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe stated, “this tragedy must not be allowed to occur again. We are determined to realize a world free of nuclear weapons.” The distaste for having their own nuclear deterrent coupled with being in a dangerous neighborhood has required that Japan turn to other countries, like the United States, for security. It is here, in the U.S.-Japanese alliance, “the cornerstone of Japan’s diplomacy”, according to Shinzo Abe, that we find the rest of the explanation. For the past 70 years, since the introduction of nuclear weapons, it is the policy of the United States to counter proliferation and curb the expansion of the nuclear club. The United States has been very successful in providing hefty incentives to states that stop their exploration or pursuit of nuclear weapons. One of these inducements, an extended nuclear deterrent, obliges the United States to provide defense and security to allies in the event of an attack or conflict. Rather than disregarding domestic public opinion and risking punishment in the international community, Japan can rely on America’s nuclear arsenal. This is how the United States has been able to use its protection to constrain risky behavior among its allies. Research in political science would suggest that these types of alliances may entrap and force the United States to get involved when allies take unnecessary risks to get their way. Neil Narang and I show in a recent working paper, however, that nuclear umbrellas can positively shape ally behavior. We find that protected allies, like Japan, are not any more likely to engage in risky business and instead use the alliance to reap political and economic gains. This is not to say that Japan has no bargaining power of its own. Japan maintains one of the highest latent nuclear capacities in the world. Experts argue that if Japan were to desire nuclear weapons its “break out” time would be short. But it’s this capability that provides Japan with leverage. In a new working paper, Gene Gerzhoy, Rachel Whitlark, and I find that this capability doesn’t necessarily

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

Issue No.1219, 10 June 2016 United States Air Force Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies| Maxwell AFB, Alabama https://cuws.au.af.mil \ https://twitter.com/USAF_CUWS Phone: 334.953.7538