Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 Articles & Other Documents:

Featured Article: CSAF Signs Munitions Realignment Directive

1. Mysterious Explosions Pose Dilemma for Iranian Leaders 2. Iranian Navy Receives 3 Ghadir-Class Submarines 3. Revolutionary Guard Official: Iran Targets Israel N-facilities in Case of Attack 4. Iran Ready to Hold Talks with P5+1 5. Iran Rushes Through Law Expelling British Ambassador 6. Satellite Images of Iran Explosion 7. Former MI chief: Iran Has Enough Material for 4 or 5 Nuclear Bombs 8. Britain 'Acutely Concerned' with N. Korea's Proliferation Activities 9. N.Korea's Succession Faces Challenges: Minister 10. North Korea Supplying Syria, Iran with Prohibited Nuclear Technology, Report Says 11. IAEA Stands Ready to Send Inspectors Back to N. Korea: Deputy Chief 12. US Aware of North Korea-Burma Nuclear Ties Since 2006 13. Pakistan Nukes Not Safe, Says Former Minister Qureshi 14. 'Reset' Is Threatened By Missiles 15. Russia’s NATO Envoy to Visit China, Iran over Missile Defense 16. Missile Defense Sparks Diplomatic Offensive 17. Russia to Deploy Kaliningrad Radar Tuesday 18. Bulava Missile Test Postponed Until 2012 19. MoD Spends £2bn on Nuclear Weapons Ahead of Trident Renewal Decision 20. Air Force Nuclear Transport Work Falls Short 21. CSAF Signs Munitions Realignment Directive 22. US Fears Dutch Research could be Biological Weapon 23. GRENELL & WALSH: Obama’s Nuclear-Reduction Fantasy 24. Iranian Fatwa Prohibits Nuclear Bomb 25. The Real Lesson of Iraq 26. Enemy of Iranian state 27. FEULNER: Meeting the Missile Threat 28. Analysis: For Iran, the Sanctions Price May Be Worth Paying

Welcome to the CPC Outreach Journal. As part of USAF Counterproliferation Center’s mission to counter weapons of mass destruction through education and research, we’re providing our government and civilian community a source for timely counterproliferation information. This information includes articles, papers and other documents addressing issues pertinent to US military response options for dealing with chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) threats and countermeasures. It’s our hope this information resource will help enhance your counterproliferation issue awareness. Established in 1998, the USAF/CPC provides education and research to present and future leaders of the Air Force, as well as to members of other branches of the armed services and Department of Defense. Our purpose is to help those agencies better prepare to counter the threat from weapons of mass destruction. Please feel free to visit our web site at http://cpc.au.af.mil/ for in-depth information and specific points of contact. The following articles, papers or documents do not necessarily reflect official endorsement of the United States Air Force, Department of Defense, or other US government agencies. Reproduction for private use or commercial gain is subject to original copyright restrictions. All rights are reserved. Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 The following articles, papers or documents do not necessarily reflect official endorsement of the United States Air Force, Department of Defense, or other US government agencies. Reproduction for private use or commercial gain is subject to original copyright restrictions. All rights are reserved.

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

Washington Post Mysterious Explosions Pose Dilemma for Iranian Leaders By Thomas Erdbrink November 25, 2011 TEHRAN — A massive blast at a missile base operated by Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps nearly two weeks ago was the latest in a series of mysterious incidents involving explosions at natural gas transport facilities, oil refineries and military bases — blasts that have caused dozens of deaths and damage to key infrastructure in the past two years. Iranian officials said the Nov. 12 blast at the missile base was an “accident,” and they ruled out any sabotage organized by the United States and its regional allies. The explosion on the Shahid Modarres base near the city of Malard was so powerful that it shook the capital, Tehran, about 30 miles to the east. Despite the official denial of foreign involvement in the latest blast, suspicions have been raised in Iran by what industry experts say is a fivefold increase in explosions at refineries and gas pipelines since 2010. Explaining the increased number of industrial incidents is proving to be a predicament for Iranian leaders, who do not want to appear vulnerable at a time when Israeli leaders have been debating military intervention against Iran over its controversial nuclear program. Officials have blamed industrial accidents for most the blasts, saying they were caused by such deficiencies as “bad welding” or “substandard manufacturing.” But media restrictions and the lack of independent investigations have made it hard to verify the claims. One oil expert said that increasingly strict sanctions prohibiting Western companies from maintaining key installations in Iran could also be to blame. “Now, many projects are finished by Iranian companies without observing safety standards,” said Reza Zandi, an Iranian journalist who specializes in energy issues. “There is clearly an increase in incidents in recent years,” said Mohammad Abumohsen, an inspector of oil and gas pipelines. At least 17 gas pipeline explosions have been reported since last year, compared with three in 2008 and 2009. At the same time, nearly a dozen major explosions have damaged refineries since 2010, but experts say it is complicated to determine the cause of such incidents. In the United States, Republican presidential contenders have called for President Obama to start covert action against Iran because of its refusal to stop its uranium-enrichment program. U.S. officials suspect the program is aimed at producing fissile material for nuclear weapons. Iran insists that it wants only to make its own fuel for nuclear power plants. Suspicions that covert action might already be underway were raised when four key gas pipelines exploded simultaneously in different locations in Qom Province in April. Lawmaker Parviz Sorouri told the semiofficial Mehr News Agency that the blasts were the work of “terrorists” and were “organized by the enemies of the Islamic Republic.” Iran in recent years has improved its ability to hunt spies, using reviews of travel and expense records to round up Iranians suspected of selling information to U.S., British and Israeli intelligence services, the Associated Press reported Monday. In May, Intelligence Minister Heidar Moslehi announced the arrest of 30 “CIA spies” who he said had been recruited to map out Iran’s energy infrastructure.

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

“One of their main objectives was carrying out sabotage activities,” Moslehi said, according to the semiofficial Fars News Agency. Iran’s parliament launched an investigation into the blast at the missile site but did not issue any findings this week as promised. One lawmaker, Mohammad Kazem Hejazi, said revealing such information might give away secrets to the “enemy,” the Iranian Labor News Agency reported Tuesday. “We are not ruling out sabotage in the Malard missile base,” said one source close to the Revolutionary Guards, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the subject. “It is not impossible to bribe a single person into doing something bad.” On Wednesday, an explosion rocked a stronghold in southern Lebanon of Iran’s regional ally, Hezbollah, which is widely believed to be supplied with Iranian missiles capable of hitting major urban centers in Israel. Hezbollah did not comment on the cause of the blast but denied that it occurred at one of the group’s arms depots, Beirut’s Daily Star newspaper reported. Iran has accused the United States and Israel of organizing the assassinations of three nuclear scientists in Tehran since 2010. The government has also blamed both countries for a computer virus called “Stuxnet,” which President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad acknowledged had disabled centrifuges used to enrich uranium. In a sign that relations between Iran and the West are further deteriorating, Iran’s parliament voted Wednesday to consider expelling the British ambassador to Tehran. The preliminary vote came after Britain on Tuesday joined the United States and Canada in adopting new financial sanctions against the Islamic Republic. If carried out, an expulsion could prompt other European countries to withdraw their ambassadors, diplomatic sources said. http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/mysterious-explosions-pose-dilemma-for-iranian- leaders/2011/11/23/gIQA8IsSvN_story.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

FARS News Agency – Iran Saturday, November 26, 2011 Iranian Navy Receives 3 Ghadir-Class Submarines TEHRAN (FNA) - The Iranian Navy expanded the fleet of its submarines after it received three more Ghadir-class submarines today, Iranian Army's Navy Commander Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari announced on Saturday. Speaking to reporters in a press conference here in Tehran on Saturday, the Navy commander underlined that all parts of the submarines have been designed and manufactured by Iranian experts. "All parts of these submarines, including their body and their advanced radar equipment and defense systems, have been designed and manufactured by our country's defense experts and with the help of the Defense Ministry," he said. Iranian commanders had earlier said that Ghadir-class submarines boosted the Navy's capability in defending the country's territorial waters. The submarine has been designed and manufactured according to the geographical and climate conditions and specifications of Iranian waters, according to military experts. Last August Iran launched four light and advanced submarines. The Ghadir-class submarines, made by the Defense Ministry's Marine Industries, officially joined Iran's naval fleet in an official ceremony attended by Iranian Defense Minister Brigadier General Ahmad Vahidi and Rear Admiral Sayyari. Iran announced in June 2009 that a home-made submarine, named Ghadir 948, had joined the naval brigade of the first naval zone.

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

In November 2009, Iran announced that its first domestically built Ghadir class submarine launched operation. The Iranian military officials said that the submarine can easily evade detection as it is equipped with sonar- evading technology and can fire missiles and torpedoes simultaneously. http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=9007274899 (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Iranian Student News Agency (ISNA) – Iran Revolutionary Guard Official: Iran Targets Israel N-facilities in Case of Attack November 26, 2011 TEHRAN (ISNA)-An Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) official warned the country would target nuclear facilities of Israel in case of rocket strike by the regime. The former Iranian Deputy IRGC for Political Affairs Brigadier Yadollah Javani said, "If Israel fires rocket at one of our nuclear facilities or vital centers, it should know that any point of Israel such as its nuclear facilities would be a target for our rockets and we have the capability." Regarding recent attacks and accusations against Iran by the West and the US, the advisor of Iranian Supreme Leader representative to the IRGC said, "Today, our enemies have been locked in a quagmire and they see no way out, so they make contradictory comments. They raise military threats against Iran whereas they do not possess such a capability." http://www.isna.ir/ISNA/NewsView.aspx?ID=News-1898665&Lang=E (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Press TV – Iran Sunday, November 27, 2011 Iran Ready to Hold Talks with P5+1 Iran's president says the Islamic Republic is always ready to hold talks with the five permanent members of the UN Security Council -- Britain, China, France, Russia, and the US -- plus Germany (P5+1). President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made the remarks during a televised interview with Jaam-e-Jam TV network on Saturday night, IRNA reported. He stated that any negotiations had to be held without preconditions, adding that Iran favored talks based on justice and mutual respect. The Iranian chief executive emphasized that the world already knew that Tehran was not seeking nuclear arms, noting that the West's stance on the country's nuclear energy program was politically motivated. Ahmadinejad added that sanctions could not prevent Iran's progress and could never stop the Iranian nation from pursuing peaceful nuclear technology. The P5+1 drew up a draft resolution over Iran's nuclear program on November 17, saying that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was to find a “diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear issue.” The draft stopped short of referring Tehran to the Security Council. In its November 8 report, the IAEA accused Iran of conducting activities related to developing nuclear weapons before 2003, adding that these activities “may still be ongoing.”

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Tehran, however, rejected the report as “unbalanced, unprofessional and prepared with political motivation and under political pressure mostly by the United States.” The United States and some of its allies accuse Tehran of pursuing military objectives in its nuclear program and have used this pretext to impose a new round of sanctions on the country's banking and energy sectors. Tehran refutes the allegations, arguing that, as a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and a member of the IAEA, it has the right to acquire and develop nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. http://www.presstv.ir/detail/212333.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Reuters India Iran Rushes Through Law Expelling British Ambassador By Mitra Amiri Monday, November 28, 2011 TEHRAN (Reuters) - A bill to downgrade Iran's ties with Britain got final approval on Monday a day after parliament approved the measure compelling the government to expel the British ambassador in retaliation for sanctions imposed over Tehran's nuclear activity. The exceptionally rapid move by the Guardian Council, a panel of 12 clerics and jurists who judge whether legislation is Islamic, reflects the urgency with which Iran is treating its reaction to the sanctions announced by Britain last week. Britain acted after a Nov. 8 report by the U.N. nuclear watchdog presenting intelligence it said suggested Iran had worked on designing an atom bomb. Iran says the intelligence is forged and that its nuclear programme has wholly peaceful aims. "The members of the Guardian Council, after examination of the plan, have approved it unanimously," council spokesman Abbasali Kadkhodai was quoted as saying on the website of the Iranian state broadcaster IRIB. The bill requires the departure of the British ambassador within two weeks, leaving the embassy to be run by a charge d'affaires. The British government has called the legislation "regrettable" and "unwarranted". Passed by legislators who chanted "Death to England" on Sunday, the law looked like a payback for London's decision to ban British banks from dealing with Iranian ones, including the Central Bank of Iran (CBI). Members of parliament said Iran would take similar action against any other countries that follow Britain's example. European Union foreign ministers are due to meet on Thursday to approve new sanctions that could cut financial links and ban oil imports from Iran over suspicions that it is trying to develop nuclear weapons. MINISTER'S FLIGHT BLOCKED Iranian media reported that Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi had been refused entry to EU air space to attend a meeting of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons in the Netherlands on Monday. Student news agency ISNA said Tehran had summoned the Hungarian ambassador to explain why Salehi's plane had been refused permission to cross the EU country's air space, quoting an Iranian foreign ministry source saying technical problems cited by Hungarian authorities were "unconvincing". The Hungarian and Iranian foreign ministries were not immediately available for comment.

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

The European measures are part of a U.S.-led drive to isolate the Islamic Republic and force it to suspend uranium enrichment, which Tehran says is its sovereign right but which the West says looks suspiciously like an atom bomb programme. Washington stopped short of imposing sanctions that would stop other countries dealing with Iran's central bank, considered a "nuclear option" due to the devastating effect it could have on Iran's oil-based economy. The central bank receives payment for the more than 2 million barrels of oil Iran exports each day, so cutting it off from the global financial system would be a hammer blow. The United States did declare the CBI an area of "primary money laundering concern," a step designed to dissuade non-U.S. banks from dealing with it. The bank denied the charge. "The financial resources of the CBI are principally from the sale of oil and its derivatives which are deposited with this bank on the basis of the country's monetary and banking law, and they are managed by the international banking system," the CBI said in a statement on its website. "The alleged performing of laundering operations on this source is a completely baseless and unprofessional claim." Reporting by Mitra Amiri; Writing by Robin Pomeroy; Editing by Mark Heinrich http://in.reuters.com/article/2011/11/28/idINIndia-60763220111128 (Return to Articles and Documents List)

CNN (Blog) Satellite Images of Iran Explosion Monday, November 28, 2011 By Adam Levine New satellite imagery shows the extent of damage to the Iranian military compound that blew up earlier this month, was extensively damaged, the Institute for Science and International Security said after an analysis of new satellite imagery. ISIS compared a November 22 image from DigitalGlobe to one from September. "Some buildings appear to have been completely destroyed. Some of the destruction seen in the image may have also resulted from subsequent controlled demolition of buildings and removal of debris. There do not appear to be many pieces of heavy equipment such as cranes or dump trucks on the site, and a considerable amount of debris is still present," according to the analysis posted on ISIS website. Senior defense officials told Barbara Starr on November 17th that the U.S. believes the Iranians were mixing volatile fuel for a rocket motor for a large ballistic missile when the accident occurred. ISIS concluded the same thing. "Iran was apparently performing a volatile procedure involving a missile engine at the site when the blast occurred," the ISIS analysis noted. At least 17 people, including a general, died as a result of an explosion on the military base near Tehran, Iranian state media reported at the time of the explosion. Lawmaker Hossein Garousi told state media the blast happened when a munitions depot accidentally caught fire at the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) military base in Bidgeneh village, located on the outskirts of Shahriar city and about 35 kilometers (21 miles) west of Tehran. The semi-official Fars news agency reported that Maj. Gen. Hassan Tehrani-Moqadam, in charge of IRGC's Office of Self sufficiency, was killed as a result of the explosion.

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530 http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2011/11/28/satellite-images-of-iran-explosion/ (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Ha’aretz Daily – Israel Former MI chief: Iran Has Enough Material for 4 or 5 Nuclear Bombs Amos Yadlin says Israel must maintain 'good channels of dialogue and understanding' with Western elements better capable of dealing with the Iranian threat. 29 November 2011 Former Military Intelligence chief Maj.-Gen. (res.) Amos Yadlin said Tuesday that Iran had enough material to develop "four or five" nuclear bombs, adding that it was imperative for Israel to maintain good relations with members of the international community capable of dealing with that threat. "Once Iran decides finally to move forward in developing a nuclear weapon, a whole new range of opportunities will open up for a fight which the international community will fight," Yadlin said in an address at the Institute for National Security Studies, where he is beginning a term as director. "Israel is not alone in the game," Yadlin said. "When the Iranians publicly reveal that they are pushing toward a nuclear weapon, Israel will no longer be the central player in the game." "This situation requires us to maintain good channels of dialogue and understanding with those who have better operational abilities than us," Yadlin added. The former MI chief said there was a good chance that sources within Western intelligence bodies would know in advance should the Iranian spiritual leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, order the country to advance toward a nuclear weapon. A general in Iran's Revolutionary Guard, Yadollah Javani, over the weekend threatened retaliation against Israel if any of its nuclear or security sites are attacked. "If Israeli missiles hit one of our nuclear facilities or other vital centers, then they should know that any part of Israeli territory would be target of our missiles, including their nuclear sites," told ISNA news agency."They [Israel] know that we have the capability to do so." Javani, the former head of the military's political department, was referring to mounting speculation that Israel would strike Iran's nuclear facilities after the International Atomic Energy Agency said Iran had tested designs used to make nuclear warheads. Iranian political and military officials have warned Israel that it would face retaliation from Shahab-3 missiles that can reach any part of Israel. Iranian volunteers affiliated with the Revolutionary Guards have held several gatherings in recent days and vowed a harsh reply to any military attacks on nuclear sites. http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/former-mi-chief-iran-has-enough-material-for-4-or-5-nuclear- bombs-1.398507 (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Yonhap News – South Korea November 24, 2011 Britain 'Acutely Concerned' with N. Korea's Proliferation Activities By Kim Deok-hyun and Lee Haye-ah

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

SEOUL, Nov. 24 (Yonhap) -- Britain expressed concern Thursday about North Korea's pursuit of nuclear weapons and the spread of atomic materials and technology to other states or terror groups. "We're acutely concerned about the role that North Korea plays in proliferation and the way in which it is trying to sell nuclear technology, knowhow and equipment to people who are interested in acquiring them," said Scott Wightman, the newly-appointed British ambassador to South Korea. "It's a major concern because it's a clear violation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and therefore sets a very bad example to other countries," the ambassador told reporters. North Korea has conducted two rounds of nuclear tests since 2006 and is pursuing an uranium enrichment program that could give the country a new source of fission material to make atomic bombs, in addition to its widely known plutonium-based nuclear weapons program. The remarks by Wightman echoed a concern raised by U.S. President Barack Obama last week in Australia that Washington will take firm action to prevent Pyongyang from transferring nuclear materials to other nations. Wightman, who arrived in Seoul early this month to take up the post, urged North Korea to give up its nuclear ambitions. "For all of those reasons we think it's absolutely vital that the North Korean program should be halted," he said. "The best means of achieving that is through the six-party talks but it's absolutely clear that the onus is on the North Korean side to take the steps necessary that will enable the six-party talks to restart and so far that hasn't happened," Wightman said. Since July, a flurry of diplomatic efforts has been underway to reopen the stalled six- party talks aimed at ending the North's nuclear weapons program in return for economic assistance, but no major breakthrough has been reported. The six-party talks, involving the two Koreas, the U.S., China, Russia and Japan, have been dormant since April 2009, when the North quit the negotiating table and then conducted its second nuclear test a month later. Early this year, the British embassy started English-language courses for about 50 North Korean defectors and arranged three-month internships for 10 of them to help them better adapt to South Korean society. Wightman said he hopes to continue the program. "We're pleased with the progress it's making and want to see it continue in the future," the ambassador said. Nearly 23,000 North Koreans have defected to South Korea, and the number has been on the rise in recent years. Many of them lack English language skills, which seriously disadvantages them in competition against their South Korean counterparts. http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/northkorea/2011/11/24/1/0401000000AEN20111124007700315F.HTML (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Bangkok Post – Thailand N.Korea's Succession Faces Challenges: Minister North Korean leader Kim Jong-Il faces challenges in transferring power to his youngest son, according to South Korea's top official on cross-border affairs. 27 November 2011 By Agence France-Presse (AFP) "I assume that the power succession is under way, though the internal and external environment is not that good," Unification Minister Yu Woo-Ik told Yonhap news agency in an interview published Sunday. Kim, 69, is believed to have speeded up the succession plan after suffering a stroke in August 2008.

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

In September last year he gave his youngest son Jong-Un senior party posts and appointed him a four-star general, in the clearest sign yet that he is the heir apparent. Yu, whose comments were confirmed by his ministry, told Yonhap in the interview conducted Friday that the leader is healthy enough to perform his job. He did not elaborate on Kim's health or what he meant by an unfavourable environment for the succession. It is unclear whether the untested Jong-Un, in his late 20s, faces political opposition to what would be the second dynastic succession. Kim senior took power when his own father Kim Il-Sung died in 1994. The North suffers severe economic problems, exacerbated by sanctions, and persistent serious food shortages. It is also under international pressure to shut down its nuclear weapons programme. The North is calling for an unconditional resumption of six-party nuclear disarmament talks which it abandoned in April 2009, one month before staging a second atomic weapons test. Washington and its allies insist that Pyongyang must first show its seriousness about the process, notably by shutting down a uranium enrichment programme which could be reconfigured for bombs. "At this point, there are few signs that indicate a new nuclear test or an armed provocation" will take place, Yu said. But he said the North's desire to trumpet its achievements next year may make it consider these options. The regime has set the goal of becoming a "great, powerful and prosperous" country by 2012, the 100th anniversary of the birth of Kim Il-Sung. Last week the North's military threatened to turn South Korea's presidential office into "a sea of fire" in an angry response to South Korea's military exercise near the tense Yellow Sea border. That exercise was staged on the first anniversary of a North Korean shelling attack which killed four people and sent tensions soaring. Yu was chosen in August to replace a hardliner as unification minister, prompting speculation the South is trying to ease tensions. He has promised flexibility in dealing with Pyongyang. In the interview Yu called for patience in handling the North. http://www.bangkokpost.com/lite/news/268131/n-korea-succession-faces-challenges-minister (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Ha’aretz Daily – Israel 28 November 2011 North Korea Supplying Syria, Iran with Prohibited Nuclear Technology, Report Says German newspaper Die Welt reports that Pyongyang has provided the countries with ‘maraging steel,’ used to upgrade missiles and centrifuges. By Yossi Melman North Korea has supplied Syria and Iran with a special kind of steel used to upgrading missiles and building centrifuges for uranium enrichment, the German newspaper Die Welt reported over the weekend. The material, called maraging steel, appears on the monitoring list of the Nuclear Suppliers Group and the Missile Technology Control Regime, and its export is prohibited to countries under sanctions such as Iran.

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

It has been known for years that Iran is trying to obtain the steel through its clandestine purchasing networks around the world. The steel would enable Tehran to construct modified centrifuges, which would in turn allow it to enrich higher quality Uranium at a faster speed. According to the report, the delivery of the steel is part of a wider North Korean expertise package to Syria, which is building a new missile factory near Homs. According to other reports, the factory is partly funded by Iran, and is expected to become operational within 18 months. Maraging steel would significantly upgrade Syria’s Scud missile capabilities and the amount of damage their warheads could inflict. The German newspaper, citing unnamed “Western security sources,” also reported that Syria is trying is trying to supply Hezbollah with M-600 missiles, that have a range of up to 300 kilometers. These would be equipped with warheads that were upgraded using maraging steel. Several UN resolutions forbid North Korea from exporting weapons or weapons technology. Also on Monday, a top Israeli security official said that a recent explosion that rocked an Iranian missile base near Tehran could delay or stop further Iranian surface-to-surface missile development. Earlier this month, Iran reiterated that the explosion at a military base near Tehran that killed 17 members of the Revolutionary Guards was an accident. It says that contrary to media speculation, the blast, which also killed a missile expert, was not carried out by Israel or the United States. Speaking at a meeting of the Knesset's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, head of the research department of Israel's military intelligence said that while the blast may have stalled some avenues of Iranian weapons development, it was from stopping all of the Islamic Republic's options. http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/north-korea-supplying-syria-iran-with-prohibited-nuclear- technology-report-says-1.398295 (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Yonhap News – South Korea November 29, 2011 IAEA Stands Ready to Send Inspectors Back to N. Korea: Deputy Chief By Lee Haye-ah SEOUL, Nov. 29 (Yonhap) -- The United Nations' nuclear watchdog is always on standby to send its inspectors back to North Korea, despite the continued defiance of the communist country, the agency's deputy chief said. Pyongyang expelled International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) monitors in early 2009 in the wake of U.N. Security Council sanctions for a missile test. Months later, it carried out its second nuclear test, following the first explosion in 2006, drawing harsher U.N. sanctions. http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/northkorea/2011/11/28/0401000000AEN20111128009400315.HTML (Return to Articles and Documents List)

The Irrawaddy News Magazine – Thailand US Aware of North Korea-Burma Nuclear Ties Since 2006 By WAI MOE Friday, November 25, 2011

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

The US has known that the Burmese regime intended to develop nuclear weapons with North Korea’s aide since 2006, The Washington Post reported on Friday ahead of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s trip to Burma next week. Referring to a statement scheduled to be released on Friday by US Senator Richard G. Lugar, the ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, the newspaper reported that the committee received information five years ago that Burma wanted to pursue a nuclear program with assistance from North Korea. “The sincerity with which a wide range of reforms has been promised by the Burmese government must be judged by whether the words are followed by actions,” Lugar’s statement was quoted in the newspaper. “An early goal of the tentative U.S. re-engagement with Burma should be full disclosure of the extent and intent of the developing Burmese nuclear program.” Keith Luse, a committee staff member, told the newspaper that the committee relayed the details to U.S. Officials but did not release the information publicly. “With the upcoming visit, Senator Lugar wanted to throw a spotlight on this issue and make sure it’s on the table in our talks with the Burmese government,” Luse said. The secret North Korea-Burma ties are one of the key Burma policy issues for the US, alongside the release of all political prisoners in Burma and the peaceful resolution of conflicts in ethnic areas. “We remain concerned about Burma’s closed political system, its treatment of minorities and holding of political prisoners, and its relationship with North Korea,” US President Barack Obama said in his statement on Burma on Nov. 18 during the Association of Southeast Asian Nations summit in Bali, Indonesia. Despite claims by experts, diplomats and defectors on Burma’s nuclear ambitions and North Korea’s assistance, Burmese government officials in Naypyidaw repeatedly denied the allegations. “When Sen. John McCain visited Myanmar *Burma+ in June, our government made it clear that it intends to walk away from its pursuit of nuclear power, even though Myanmar has many research and development needs to which nuclear technology could be applied,” Zaw Htay, a director of the office of Burma’s president, wrote in a commentary published in The Washington Post on Nov. 17. “The new government decided after the incident at Japan’s Fukushima site this spring not to pursue the nuclear path.” Apart from Burma’s nuclear ambition, North Korea has also been involved in the modernization of Burma’s warfare systems, including its middle range missiles program and other facilities. Bertil Lintner, a veteran journalist in Southeast Asia, wrote in a paper in April that in June 2006, North Korean tunnel experts were confirmed to have arrived in Naypyidaw, where the Burmese regime has built an extensive underground bunker complex. The journalist also said that Burma is developing Scud-type missiles with North Korea’s assistance. He wrote that two military factories near Minhla [on the west bank of the Irrawaddy River in the middle of Burma+ “are now churning out more advanced weapons, including Scud-type missiles. These are more difficult to detect from the air because they are located partly underground.” “A Scud-armed Burma would place its capabilities a significant notch above its Southeast Asian neighbors, which do not possess such long-range missiles,” Lintner said. It has been reported that North Korean technicians have been around Minhla Town and its factory sites. “My friends in Minhla told me that North Korean technicians are seen in the town and around the military factory sites of Malun and Konggyi villages,” said Chit Tin, who won a constituency in the township in the 1990 election, which was not recognized by the Burmese junta, and is now exiled in Thailand.

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

In recent years, North Koreans have not only been seen in Naypyidaw and at military sites, but also learning Burmese at the University of Foreign Languages (UFL) in Rangoon, according to students and staffers at the school. “North Koreans come to the UFL by North Korean embassy vehicles. They do not talk with other foreign students,” said a student at the UFL. Burma established a diplomatic relationship with North Korea following the 1962 coup by Gen Ne Win in Burma. However, Burma cut official diplomatic ties with Pyongyang following after North Korean agents attacked a South Korean delegation led by President Chun Doo Hwan in Rangoon in 1983. The re-establishment of North Korea-Burma ties was officially announced in April 2007, but observers said the military ties resumed in the early 1990s. In recent months, it was reported that the first ever North Korean restaurant, called “Pyongyang Koryo Restaurant,” had opened in Rangoon in July. http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=22542 (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Times of India – India Pakistan Nukes Not Safe, Says Former Minister Qureshi Press Trust of India (PTI) November 28, 2011 ISLAMABAD: Pakistan's nuclear weapons are not safe under the present PPP dispensation, country's former foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi has said, evoking an angry response from the government, which rejected his contention as "baseless". Qureshi said, Pakistan's nuclear programme was not safe under President Asif Ali Zardari's leadership. The ex-PPP leader has recently parted company with the ruling party and announced joining Imran Khan's Pakistan Tehrik-e- Insaf party. The former Zardari ally, made these remarks at a public rally at Ghotki in Sindh where he announced joining hands with the cricketer-turned politician. He is the highest ranking Pakistani politician to comment that the country's nuclear weapons were not safe. His remarks come on the heels of warnings by Western experts that Islamabad's nukes could fall into the hands of Taliban terrorists. Though Qureshi did not give details of how Pakistan's nukes were in danger but promised to talk about this in detail at the next public gathering in Karachi. He said, he had been foreign minister and thus understood the issue well and knew the pressures and stresses Pakistan was facing over its nuclear programme. He also came down hard on the government's alliance with the US as well as US policies towards Pakistan. Reacting angrily to Qureshi's remarks, the Pakistan government rejected his contentions as it declared there would be no compromise on a programme which is an integral to the country's defence. Foreign office spokesperson Tehmina Janjua said the "insinuations" made against the president were "baseless and strongly refuted". "Our policy of maintaining credible minimum deterrence will be maintained. Under no circumstances can this national programme, which is integral to Pakistan's defence, be compromised," Janjua said. The government, armed forces and people of Pakistan are "absolutely committed to this objective", she said.

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Under the 18th constitutional amendment, all powers related to the atomic programme and nuclear arsenal were transferred to parliament and the "executive authority is vested fully with the prime minister", Janjua said. In line with the amendments, the National Command Authority - which consists of the ministers of defence, foreign affairs, interior and finance, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff committee and the three service chiefs - is now headed by the prime minister. The strategic plans division of the National Command Authority is headed by a director general who also serves as Secretary of the NCA. Besides the NCA and SPD, there is the strategic forces command and these "well-established institutional mechanisms are responsible for managing Pakistan's strategic assets and programmes", Janjua said. "We have effective custodial controls", Janjua said, adding that Pakistan is a responsible nuclear weapon state. The NCA meets frequently to review all matters related to strategic programmes and to provide direction for upgrading these programmes to suit Pakistan's defence requirements, she said. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/pakistan/Pakistan-nukes-not-safe-says-former-minister- Qureshi/articleshow/10905774.cms (Return to Articles and Documents List)

The Moscow Times 'Reset' Is Threatened By Missiles 24 November 2011 By Alexandra Odynova and Alexander Bratersky President Dmitry Medvedev warned Wednesday that Russia would quit the New START nuclear arms reduction pact with the United States if America continues plans to deploy a missile defense shield in Eastern Europe. If Washington and Brussels do not cooperate with Moscow on the matter, it could also result in Russia targeting shield sites in Europe with its own ballistic missiles, Medvedev said. The threats, which come days before Russian parliamentary elections, endanger the "reset" in bilateral relations that was started with the New START treaty. Russian analysts called Medvedev's promises "adequate," given the United States' reluctance to compromise, but some also voiced doubts that added pressure would solve the impasse. Russia would implement a multistage upgrade of its missile forces should the United States proceed with plans to deploy elements of its missile defense in Europe, Medvedev said in a video statement released by the Kremlin. "Sadly, the United States and its NATO partners … have no intention, at least for now, to take our concerns about the European missile defense into account," a stern-looking Medvedev said in the video. Military reaction would culminate in the deployment of Iskander missile complexes targeting U.S. missile defense sites on Russia's border, he said. Among the sites to house the Iskanders — which have a range of 500 kilometers — is Russia's Baltic exclave of Kaliningrad, which borders on Poland, he said. Medvedev did not explicitly list any demands for the United States or NATO, but urged dialogue. He also reminded that Moscow requested last year that the U.S. missile defense system in Europe be run jointly. A NATO spokeswoman said following the speech that the alliance would "thoroughly study" Medvedev's statement, RIA-Novosti reported.

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

The White House said late Wednesday that it would proceed with missile defense shield plans despite Medvedev’s statement. U.S. missile defense shield plans for Eastern Europe, discussed since 2002, envision deploying missile interceptors and radars in new NATO members near the Russian border. Romania has agreed to host U.S. interceptors starting 2015, and Poland starting 2018. Talks with Bulgaria are ongoing. American officials insist that the missiles in Europe would be meant to fend off a potential threat from Iran, which is pushing forward with long-range missile and alleged nuclear arms programs. But Russian officials say that despite Iran being a target, the shield would also be capable of intercepting Russian missiles, crippling the military parity between the two former Cold War rivals. Though military experts have voiced skepticism about whether current military technologies allow for the interception of any long-range ballistic missiles, the issue has soured relations between Moscow and Washington in recent years. Tensions rose again last month after NATO rejected a Russian request for legal guarantees of the shield's safety for Moscow. Medvedev hinted earlier this week that the Kremlin was planning "sensible measures" in reaction to the stalemate. Russia's ambassador to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin, echoed the president at a news conference in Moscow on Wednesday, announcing that "the diplomatic means [for solving the deadlock] have run out." "We won't let anyone take us for fools," Rogozin, who is known for his hawkish stance, was quoted as saying by Interfax. But he also followed Medvedev in saying the harsh measures were to prompt a dialogue with the United States. The military reaction outlined by Medvedev is "adequate," said Igor Korotchenko, editor-in-chief of Natsionalnaya Oborona (National Defense) magazine. "Russia gives the United States a fair warning about its plans four years in advance," Korotchenko told The Moscow Times by telephone. But "dropping out of the New START treaty is a radical measure," he added. However, military analyst Alexander Khramchikhin said upping the ante in the standoff is unlikely to solve the problem because neither side is ready to compromise, RIA-Novosti reported. Improving ties with the United States, which grew strained in the last years of Prime Minister Vladimir Putin's presidency in the mid-2000s, was touted as one of Medvedev's main achievements. But after the duo's decision to swap jobs after the presidential election in March, many analysts questioned whether Medvedev, a longtime subordinate of Putin, had any independent foreign policy at all. The hard-line stance may also be intended for the domestic populace, which is to elect a new State Duma next week. Medvedev is topping the party list for the ruling United Russia party, which is struggling to maintain its unchallenged domination in the lower chamber, and saber-rattling is seen as likely to add votes to the party. The Iskander threat also follows the United States announcing on Tuesday that it would stop providing data to Russia on non-nuclear military forces in Europe. Russia and the NATO states agreed to exchange such information before the end of the Cold War in 1990, signing the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty. But Moscow suspended its observance of the treaty in 2007, also over concerns about the U.S. missile defense shield in Europe. The United States and its NATO allies, however, continued to provide their data to Russia until this week.

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

"After four years of non-Russian implementation … we think that it's important to take some countermeasures vis- a-vis Russia," State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said Tuesday. http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/reset-is-threatened-by-missiles/448545.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

RIA Novosti – Russian Information Agency Russia’s NATO Envoy to Visit China, Iran over Missile Defense 28 November 2011 Russian envoy to NATO Dmitry Rogozin will visit China and Iran in mid-January to discuss a U.S.-backed global missile defense network. “We are planning to visit both Beijing and Tehran soon under the Russian president’s directive, to discuss the planned deployment of a global missile defense network,” Rogozin said during a roundtable meeting at the lower house of the Russian parliament. Rogozin said he would meet with Foreign Ministry and General Staff officials in China, and hold talks with the head of the Supreme National Security Council and diplomats in Iran. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev outlined on Wednesday a series of possible "appropriate measures" if missile defense talks between Moscow and Washington result in failure, including the deployment of "advanced offensive weapon systems" targeting the European component of the missile defense network. Russia and NATO tentatively agreed to cooperate on the European missile defense network at the Lisbon Summit in November 2010 but differences in approaches toward the project led to a deadlock in negotiations. The Kremlin says the U.S. expanding anti-missile system in Europe is a potential threat to the Russian nuclear arsenal, while Washington is trying to convince Moscow that the system poses no threat to Russia, that it is needed to protect against attack from "rogue states" such as Iran. Rogozin called the U.S. proposals to jointly monitor missile threats over Europe and to allow Russian experts to take part in the first tests of the global missile shield next spring as “absurd” on Monday. “It looks more like propaganda than a serious proposal…Our specialists might have been interested in monitoring the tests if they could use telemetric equipment but Washington will not allow that,” he said. “They said our experts could look through binoculars from some sort of a barge from a long distance…We have a planetarium in Moscow and it is very exciting to watch the stars there, so they might well have invited us to visit this planetarium,” Rogozin quipped. The United States and NATO plan to place elements of the proposed global missile shield in Poland, Romania and Turkey. Moscow is seeking written, legally-binding guarantees that the shield will not be directed against it but Washington has refused to put its verbal assurances in writing. MOSCOW, November 28 (RIA Novosti) http://en.ria.ru/world/20111128/169117562.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Russia Today (RT) – Russia Missile Defense Sparks Diplomatic Offensive

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

28 November 2011 Russia could review its relations with NATO on the critically-important issue of Afghanistan if it does not react to Moscow’s statements made in response to America’s missile defense plans, Russia's envoy to the alliance has said. "If our partners do not react to the statements [which were] predictable and proportionate to risks and threats, we will have to reconsider our relations with our partners in other areas as well," Dmitry Rogozin said, as cited by Interfax. Such a review could apply to Russia’s co-operation over the transit corridor used by NATO to move equipment and supplies into Afghanistan. Moscow’s permanent representative to NATO noted that he supports a systematic approach when it comes to addressing the problem. Earlier last week, President Dmitry Medvedev outlined a raft of military and diplomatic measures in response to the US deploying its missile defense shield in Europe and failing to provide any legal guarantees that the system would not be targeted against Russia. On Monday, speaking at a roundtable at the State Duma, Rogozin underlined that when it comes to national security, Moscow must think globally, “just as our partners do.” He stressed that Russia would only be respected if its partners see it as a power that is capable of an adequate response to “any aggressor or group of aggressors.” The diplomat pointed out that the US plans all its military operations based on the concept of a lightning strike. NATO can simultaneously fight two large wars and six medium-scale ones. “It’s a good question, especially for us, who would be enemies in large wars,” Rogozin noted. The president of the Council for Strategic Priorities, Aleksey Pushkov, also believes that Russia should review its relations with NATO in the case that the alliance does not react to Moscow’s statements. If the military bloc pushes ahead with its projects despite Russia’s harsh rhetoric, the latter would lose credibility and cease to be taken seriously. Meanwhile, another participant in the roundtable discussion, the chairman of the State Duma Committee on Foreign Affairs, Konstantin Kosachev, underlined that President Medvedev’s statement does not mean an end to Russia’s dialogue with the US and NATO. What Russia did was warn its partners that it is determined to safeguard its national security. The Kremlin outlined that chances of reaching a compromise have not been exhausted yet. If the US changes its stance on missile defense, Russia will continue to co-operate with America and NATO in the area of strategic stability. However, because of “our partners’ destructive actions”, there are fewer possibilities to come to agreements, Kosachev said. The official pointed out that Medvedev’s speech on November 23 was an adequate reaction to what is happening at Russia’s talks with the US and NATO “after the New START treaty came into force.” Since the beginning of the year, Moscow has come up with a number of initiatives aimed at the positive development of talks on America’s planned missile defense. Meanwhile, Washington and its NATO allies were only going through the motions of holding a dialogue with Moscow, while pushing ahead with their plans for a European missile defense shield without reference to Russia’s concerns. Earlier in the day, Dmitry Rogozin met with Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov to discuss preparations for the ministerial session of the Russia-NATO Council, due to be held in Brussels on December 8. It is expected that Medvedev’s recent statements will be among issues for discussion at the gathering. The Russian envoy to NATO also said on Monday that on the president’s orders, he will soon travel to China and Iran to talk about the missile defense problem.

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Further efforts to reach an agreement on building the missile defense shield close to Russia’s western border will be made at the NATO summit in Chicago next May. http://rt.com/politics/nato-afghanistan-missile-defense-365/ (Return to Articles and Documents List)

ITAR-TASS – Russia 28 November 2011 Russia to Deploy Kaliningrad Radar Tuesday By Lyudmila Alexandrova MOSCOW, November 28 (Itar-Tass) —— Russia will respond to the U.S. missile shield in Europe with a radar in its westernmost Kaliningrad enclave already on Tuesday and experts say it has been designed alongside new ballistic missiles long ago. The radar deployment was announced by President Dmitry Medvedev last week as a major response measure to the U.S. missile shield and former chief-of-staff of the strategic missile forces Viktor Yesin told Izvestia daily it will go on duty on Tuesday and will join the Russian nationwide missile defense. The full name of the object is “over-horizon missile attack warning radar Voronezh-DM.” Yesin said it will control the western direction and has a range of up to six thousand kilometers. “Actually, it covers the whole of Europe, including Great Britain,” he said. The new-generation radar was designed by the Moscow Distant Radio Communications Research Institute. A similar one has been operating in Armavir, Krasnodar region since 2009. In 2012 another radar will be launched in Irkutsk region. Yesin said in contrast to predecessors the new radar is subject to modernization. President Medvedev issued a harsh statement last week as the United States refused to provide legal guarantees that its missile defense in Europe does not target Russia. Besides Kaliningrad radar, he also listed the deployment of Iskander missiles as a response. He promised future strategic ballistic missiles will be capable of breaking through the missile shield and will be armed with highly efficient warheads. He said the last resort would be Russian withdrawal from the new START Treaty with the United States. Two days after Medvedev’s statement the Russian military leadership reported about the measures it took. Aerospace Defense Commander Oleg Ostapenko said the creation of the force initiated by Medvedev last year has been practically completed and it will go on combat duty on December 1. The Aerospace Defense will be subordinated directly to the chief-of-staff of the Russian armed forces and will include eight operating radars and two under construction in Russia, Belarus, Azerbaijan, and Kazakhstan. The force will be in charge of space control, missile defense of the Russian capital, air defense troops with anti-aircraft brigades and radio-technical troops. Nezavisimaya Gazeta daily believes although the creation of the Aerospace Defense does not mean a new arms race it may impede cooperation with the United States in missile defense if the countries succeed to get out of the current deadlock. Ostapenko said Iskander missiles will be deployed in Kaliningrad in time fixed by the national leadership. It is “a modern, high-precision, mobile missile complex of a new generation” that can efficiently counteract offensive systems as well, he said. The defense ministry will also increase missile defense capabilities of strategic missile forces (RVSN). The second regiment of Teikovsky missile formation in Ivanovo region will get the latest Yars missile complex to replace old RS- 24 strategic missiles, RVSN spokesman Vadim Koval said.

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

In the meantime, observes said the United States’ reaction to Medvedev’s statement was surprisingly calm. Washington said it would not change its missile defense plans. Western experts suggested Medvedev targeted not the West, but the Russian audience which likes anti-American rhetoric on the eve of elections. Russian experts, in their turn, said the response measures announced by Medvedev do not pose a major threat from the military point of view and stressed the Russian economy will hardly be able to finance a new arms race. They believe Medvedev made the statement to foster the search for a way out of the deadlock. “If we withdraw from the START that fixes strict and synchronized reduction parameters the Americans will be free to do everything they want,” said Maxim Minayev from the Center of Political Situation. He told Izvestia the United States do not eliminate decommissioned warheads but store them and it is easy to redeploy them. Russia has to utilize them 100 percent as they are simply outdated and their service life has expired. “When President Medvedev says we shall withdraw from the START the Americans only smile. They are well aware of the state of our military-defense complex,” said President of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems Leonid Ivashov. “Medvedev’s statement has a clear election component. On behalf of the ruling tandem he displayed readiness to adhere to a strict line in the dialogue with the United States. The patriotically-minded electorate undoubtedly welcomed it,” Minayev said. The Kaliningrad radar was designed to close the gap in the national missile defense system that appeared after Russia abandoned the radar in Ukraine and another radar was pulled down in Latvia. Besides, Voronezh-DM has to replace the Volga radar in Belarus, military expert Alexander Golts told the Russian BBC service. Political scientist Vyacheslav Nikonov told the government Rossiyskaya Gazeta that he believes Medvedev’s statement will not aggravate Russia-U.S. relationship and will not trigger a new arms race. “Nobody said anything about an arms race. In this case Moscow simply signals that the creation of a missile defense targeted against Russia is unacceptable.” “Russia will be satisfied with any option which is not related to the creation of the missile defense. U.S. arguments that the European missile shield is necessary for protection against the nuclear-missile threat from Iran are not convincing. They are simply funny as Iran does not have such weapons that are capable of reaching Europe, to say nothing about the territory of the United States,” he said. http://www.itar-tass.com/c39/283362_print.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

The Moscow Times – Russia Bulava Missile Test Postponed Until 2012 28 November 2011 The Moscow Times A fourth and final test launch of the Bulava intercontinental missile scheduled for Monday was postponed, RIA- Novosti reported. "The final Bulava test launch will be delayed until a later time. A final date has not yet been set," a Defense Ministry source told the news agency. The reason for the delay was not made clear, and another test is unlikely to take place before the end of the year, Interfax reported. If the launch had been successful, officials then planned to incorporate the Bulava into the country's nuclear arsenal, along with the submarine Yury Dolgoruky that had been used in prior tests.

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

The postponement follows three successful Bulava launches earlier in the year, most recently on Oct. 28 near the Kamchatka Peninsula. In total, 17 Bulava tests have been carried out — seven of which hit snags — since testing began in 2004. The missile is Russia's latest three-stage ballistic weapon. It was developed in the Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology and is considered a cornerstone of the country's nuclear deterrent. It boasts a range of up to 8,000 kilometers, can carry up to 10 warheads with a payload of 100 to 150 kilotons. It is deployed from the new Borei-class nuclear submarines, eight of which the Defense Ministry plans to build by 2015. http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/bulava-missile-test-postponed-until-2012/448804.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

The Guardian – U.K. MoD Spends £2bn on Nuclear Weapons Ahead of Trident Renewal Decision Ministry accused of pre-empting parliament's decision on Trident and attempting to force the hand of future governments By Rob Edwards Sunday, 27 November 2011 The Ministry of Defence is spending £2bn on new nuclear weapons plants before a formal decision has been taken over whether to replace Trident warheads, according to ministers. The revelation has prompted fierce attacks on the MoD for making "a complete mockery" of the democratic process by pre-empting a decision and so attempting to force the hands of future governments. The ministry says the investment helps to ensure the safety of the existing Trident warheads, but accepts that the money also maintains the capability to design a new warhead "should that be required". Details of the MoD's investments have been unveiled for the first time. They include a £734m facility called Mensa for dismantling and assembling of warheads, a risky but essential maintenance process; a £634m highly enriched uranium plant called Pegasus; and a £231m high explosives factory called Circinus. The plants are being built at the Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) sites at Aldermaston and Burghfield in Berkshire. Other facilities with similarly stellar names but smaller bills – Orion, Gemini, and Leo – are also being built as part of the AWE development plan covering 2005 to 2015. The costs of two more – Octans and Orchard – are being kept secret for commercial reasons. The figures have been released by the defence minister Peter Luff in answer to a parliamentary question by the Green MP Caroline Lucas. Although a few were known from freedom of information requests or other sources, the bulk had previously been kept confidential. "The fact that the MoD signed off on these costs before a decision has even been made on replacing the Trident warhead makes a complete mockery of the democratic process," said Lucas. "It's clear that replacing this extravagant and discredited white elephant project would mean locking the UK into the costly technologies of the past, at a time when we should be developing the realistic defence solutions of the future." She called on the government to end the "culture of secrecy" that allowed crucial military spending decisions to be pushed through without proper parliamentary scrutiny.

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Spending so much on nuclear weapons at a time of economic austerity was also "morally indefensible and economically illiterate", she said. The government decided in October last year to postpone a decision on whether to develop a new nuclear warhead until after the next election in 2015. To save money, and to appease the Liberal Democrats, ministers also deferred the main investment decision on replacing the submarines that will carry the warheads. According to Peter Burt of the Nuclear Information Service, the new weapons plants would have a life of at least 40 years. "By spending billions of pounds now, the MoD is trying to force the hands of future governments into developing a new nuclear warhead, regardless of whether it will be necessary or affordable," he said. An MoD spokeswoman pointed out that the government was committed to a "continuous at-sea nuclear deterrent" based on Trident. "This investment maintains the safety of the current Trident warhead stockpile by sustaining essential facilities and skills," she said. "It also helps maintain the capability to design a replacement warhead should that be required following decisions in the next parliament." http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/nov/27/mod-trident-nuclear-weapons-spending?newsfeed=true (Return to Articles and Documents List)

News Tribune – Tacoma, WA Air Force Nuclear Transport Work Falls Short The active-duty Air Force wing at Joint Base Lewis-McChord is the only one in the U.S. military tasked with one of the nation’s most sensitive and secretive missions: transporting nuclear weapons By CHRISTIAN HILL; Staff writer November 25, 2011 The active-duty Air Force wing at Joint Base Lewis-McChord is the only one in the U.S. military tasked with one of the nation’s most sensitive and secretive missions: transporting nuclear weapons. In military parlance, the mission is called Prime Nuclear Airlift Force, or PNAF. The 62nd Airlift Wing has a motto for that mission: “PNAF... Perfect... Always!” Not anymore. For the first time, the wing received an overall rating of “unsatisfactory” after a weeklong inspection that concluded Monday. The rating stems from an isolated incident involving an individual assigned to the mission, said an Air Mobility Command official with knowledge of the inspection’s findings. The official declined to provide further details. Lt. Col. Glen Roberts, an AMC spokesman, said neither nuclear weapons nor related components were used during the inspection and the public was not at risk. “There was never any danger,” he said. “The Air Force policy is we don’t get into specifics on the inspections.” Roberts said the wing, which has performed the mission since 1997, can continue to do so even with the “unsatisfactory” rating. Among the six areas the teams from the AMC’s inspector general’s office look at is personnel reliability, or the physical and psychological health of the crew members who handle, secure and transport the weapons and nuclear components.

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

The inspectors also examine mission management and safety, as well as how the weapons and components are handled, loaded and moved. The airlift wing is best known for flying its C-17 cargo jets into Iraq and Afghanistan, carrying supplies and people for the war effort. The flight crews based at McChord also get attention for bringing humanitarian relief into disaster zones such as Haiti and Japan. The nuclear mission is much less publicized but extremely demanding on airmen. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer reported in 2007 that the job is so sensitive that something as simple as a traffic ticket or as traumatic as a death in the family must be reported. “If you are worried about anything other than dealing with these items (nuclear weapons), you should not be on a mission,” Capt. Nathan Higgins, an aircraft commander, told the newspaper at the time. “We want to make sure you are up to the challenge, that your head is in the mission.” Roberts said a typical “nuclear surety” inspection — which occurs every 18 months with more limited inspections in between — requires that hundreds of items meet the Air Force’s exacting standards for this mission. “Perfection is the standard with this mission, and all members are held to that standard,” he said. Select flight crews from the 4th Airlift Squadron fly the weapons, but other units within the wing contribute to the mission. That includes providing security, maintaining the aircraft and meeting the medical needs of the flight crews, wrote Col. R. Wyn Elder, the wing’s commander, in an online commentary that appeared on its website shortly before the inspection. “There is no margin for error in operations within the nation’s nuclear enterprise ... I can’t stress it enough: PNAF is the 62nd AW’s number one, no-fail mission,” A spokeswoman at McChord referred all questions about the rating to Air Mobility Command, based at Scott Air Force Base in Illinois. Gen. Raymond Johns Jr., the mission’s certifying officer and AMC commander, was briefed on the findings of the inspection Wednesday. He will evaluate the findings and give orders to correct the problems and could hold responsible parties accountable, including possible discipline, Roberts said. An inspection team will return to reinspect within 90 days. The wing has always received a grade of “satisfactory” – the only other overall rating – in prior inspections. A story by the wing’s public affairs office in March said it had passed its nuclear surety inspection, and the McChord office that manages the safe and reliable transport of nuclear weapons and components had won a safety award for the 12th time in 13 years. The story noted the office oversaw the safe delivery of more than 32,000 pounds of nuclear or nuclear-related cargo worldwide last year. http://www.thenewstribune.com/2011/11/25/1920298/air-force-nuclear-transport-work.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Military.com CSAF Signs Munitions Realignment Directive November 29, 2011 Air Force News, By Vicki Stein

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

WASHINGTON -- Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz signed the Program Action Directive Nov. 20 that details the transfer of munitions squadrons responsible for nuclear mission support from Air Force Materiel Command to Air Force Global Strike Command. The realignment has formally begun and will complete this December. The realignment of functions will place the command, control and authority for the operational mission with the wing commander. This is another step in continuing to strengthen the nuclear enterprise. Under a previous move, these munitions squadrons were consolidated under AFMC's Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center. With Air Force Global Strike Command now fully mission capable, the time is right for a final realignment under the command that also has responsibility for daily nuclear deterrence operations, Schwartz said. "The munitions squadrons were placed under Air Force Materiel Command at the outset of our effort to reinvigorate the nuclear enterprise," Schwartz said. "AFMC and its leaders have done an outstanding job restoring excellence in munitions operations, and they, along with the Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center, will remain a key part of the nuclear munitions sustainment and integration process." The realignment will allow for enhanced unity of command under a single major command responsible for most of the nuclear operational mission, he said. This will continue focused oversight and standardization of nuclear weapons, cruise missiles, and re-entry vehicles/systems maintenance, storage, accountability, handling and control. "Most important, by doing this we are continuing to strengthen the nuclear enterprise while seeking constant improvement and doing things the best way possible for safe, secure and effective operations," Schwartz said. Squadrons will realign in place as well as remain about the same size organizationally, so disruptions to operations and people at the units will be minimal. "Almost two years after being established, Air Force Global Strike Command is now a mature organization capable of integrating the munitions function into the larger nuclear mission," Schwartz said. Affected organizations are: the 798th Munitions Maintenance Group at Minot Air Force Base, N.D.; 498th Munitions Maintenance Group at Whiteman AFB, Mo.; 15th Munitions Squadron at F.E. Warren AFB, Wyo.; 16th Munitions Squadron at Malmstrom AFB, Mont.; 17th Munitions Squadron at Minot AFB; 19th Munitions Squadron at Whiteman AFB; 498th Nuclear Systems Wing at Kirtland AFB, N.M.; and 798th Munitions Maintenance Group, Detachment 1, at Vandenberg AFB, Calif. During the next several months, officials at the Air Force's Strategic Deterrence and Nuclear Integration Directorate, as the Air Staff nuclear mission integrator, will lead the internal implementation process, including specifics regarding final manpower and unit realignments. http://www.military.com/news/article/air-force-news/csaf-signs-munitions-realignment-directive.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Radio Netherlands Worldwide – Netherlands US Fears Dutch Research could be Biological Weapon November 25, 2011 The US has expressed deep concern about a deadly variant of the avian influenza virus ‘created’ by a Dutch professor and has delayed publication of his findings pending an investigation. Experts fear terrorists could get their hands on the information and use it as a biological weapon, reports Dutch newspaper de Volkskrant on Friday.

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

In a twist of irony, the research was commissioned by US medical research agency NIH. The institute asked Ron Fouchier - professor of molecular virology at Rotterdam’s Erasmus teaching hospital – to investigate whether the bird flu virus H5N1 could lead to a pandemic. Virus DNA adjusted Many scientists reacted with scepticism to the research, which was carried out amid high security. Fouchier showed that with a small number of mutations in the virus DNA, he was able to change it into an extremely infectious variant. Avian flu is rarely transferred from animal to human, but, when it happens, the result is usually fatal. By deliberately modifying the virus’ genes, Dr Fouchier was able to induce H5N1 transmission between ferrets, which are commonly used to study flu transmission between humans because of similar immune systems. Research as bioterrorism The Dutch professor submitted an article based on his research to the US scientific journal Science. The magazine contacted the US advisory board for bioterrorism looking for approval before publication. The National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity is looking into whether the altered virus could have global consequences should it be released ‘into the wild’. De Volkskrant says Dr Fouchier is unwilling to comment until the results of the investigation are made known. The decision to postpone and possibly prohibit his article has sparked off a huge debate on scientific freedom among researchers. The findings of separate Japanese research on H5N1, which show similar results, are also being examined. http://www.rnw.nl/africa/bulletin/us-fears-dutch-research-could-be-biological-weapon (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Washington Times OPINION/Commentary GRENELL & WALSH: Obama’s Nuclear-Reduction Fantasy U.S. nonproliferation strategy could trigger arms race By Richard Grenell and Eddie Walsh, The Washington Times Saturday, November 26, 2011 Earlier this month, James N. Miller, principal undersecretary of defense for policy, acknowledged to the House Committee on Armed Services that China is increasing the size of its nuclear arsenal, North Korea continues to pursue the development of enriched-uranium weapons, and Iran is advancing its own nuclear ambitions. Mr. Miller also admitted that despite the administration’s decision to unilaterally declare the number of nuclear weapons in the American stockpile, neither China nor Russia has met the calls to increase transparency in their programs. The nuclear issues Mr. Miller chose not to address, at least publicly, should be of even greater concern to policymakers. They include rising concerns that Arab states, including Saudi Arabia and Egypt, will pursue their own nuclear programs in reaction to Iranian progress. He also did not tackle the increasing threat of North Korean nuclear proliferation, nor did he confront the negative security assurances provided to South Korea and Japan as a result of the 2010 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR). Mr. Miller’s silence on emerging issues and lingering concerns similarly should not go unnoticed. He avoided the rising threat posed by emerging nonnuclear, high-end capabilities, including offensive cyberweapons and long- standing questions about the safety and readiness of the U.S. nuclear arsenal without proper testing. He also failed to elaborate on what fallout NATO’s campaign in Libya would have on future denuclearization and nonproliferation diplomacy.

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

It is clear that the administration’s nuclear nonproliferation policies are not working to advance American national security interests. The administration is not preventing nuclear proliferation, maintaining strategic deterrence, strengthening deterrence and reassuring U.S. allies and partners, or sustaining a safe, secure and effective nuclear arsenal - the very objectives that the administration set forth in the 2010 NPR. Despite these obvious contradictions, the administration continues to press forward with its efforts to reduce U.S. nuclear weapons. If the United States is serious about reducing its nuclear arsenal without undermining American national security, the administration must take a new policy approach. Policy should rest with the very objectives that it is failing to achieve, starting with nonproliferation. Given that the high-end-threat environment has only increased under this administration’s watch, the unilateral reduction of the U.S. nuclear arsenal should not be prioritized as a stand- alone objective. A new policy approach will require a more accurate portrayal of current and future high-end threats that affect America’s nuclear posture. In the Cold War, nuclear deterrence centered on the threat posed by nuclear-state adversaries. The threat of U.S. nuclear weapons was designed to remind such adversaries that violence against Americans would be met with shock and awe - overwhelming, instant and certain devastation. Today, new threats from unconventional sources have emerged. These include non-state actors targeting Americans and their allies as well as rogue states’ illegal pursuit of nuclear technology. Both threats call for swift and sure responses from the United States. Nuclear options should not be ruled out. On the modern battlefield, conventional weapons also are increasingly less effective against many of today’s military technologies. Many countries have secret command-and-control centers, underground military installations and hidden missile silos that can only be taken out with the scale of destruction that comes from high-end weapons, including ballistic missiles armed with nuclear weapons. It is risky, albeit foolish, to assume that conventional weapons will be enough to respond to the growing cutting-edge-technology risks of tomorrow. The administration’s limited and restricted nuclear strategy misses tomorrow’s threats, making it increasingly difficult to reassure Americans and allies that the United States will continue to possess the offensive and defensive capabilities required to mitigate any threat, anywhere in the world. Finally, the recent Stuxnet incident reveals that nuclear capabilities are not the only high-end threats that can destroy and disable critical infrastructure. The emergence of new high-end threats, particularly in the cyber- and space domains, require consideration as part of the U.S. nuclear posture. To say that the “United States will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against nonnuclear weapons states that are party to the [Non- Proliferation Treaty+ and in compliance with their nuclear nonproliferation obligations” leaves Americans’ safety at risk. It shows that the administration does not appreciate the need to have all options on the table to deal with the full spectrum of high-end threats. The administration also appears unwilling to address the elephant in the room: In an era of strategic cyberwarfare, there is an increased need for redundancy in capabilities. This appears to contradict the administration’s focus on nuclear arsenal reduction. For these reasons, American policymakers and American allies, especially in Asia, should answer Mr. Miller’s call to vigorously debate the NPR 2010 implementation in its entirety. One year on, it is clear that the administration’s hypothesis that other countries would follow the United States in making nuclear concessions was naive and wrong. As a result, Americans and their allies face greater high-end threats than they did when the administration assumed office. This should be a critical cause for concern. The administration’s nuclear accommodations are forcing countries such as Japan, Saudi Arabia and South Korea to question their national security policies. A decision by just one of these states to pursue nuclear weapons could threaten the entire nonproliferation regime on which the United States has relied for 60 years. If the U.S. hopes to preserve the status quo, it should not be blindly reducing its nuclear arsenal.

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Richard Grenell was the director of communications and spokesman for four U.S. ambassadors to the United Nations from 2001-08. Eddie Walsh is an accredited foreign correspondent and nonresident WSD-Handa Fellow at Pacific Forum CSIS. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/nov/26/obamas-nuclear-reduction-fantasy/ (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Daily Pioneer – India OPINION/Letters to the Editor Iranian Fatwa Prohibits Nuclear Bomb Sunday, 27 November 2011 By Hassan Rahimi Majd, New Delhi Recently a number of articles, including an editorial, have been published about Iran in The Pioneer. “A bomb that scares us all” by Kanchan Gupta (November 19); the editorial “Iran stands isolated” (November 21) and “Iran’s nuclear facility is being watched” by George Jahn (November 22). Here is a common response to all of them because the issues raised are the same. The Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency in his recent report could not prove that the nuclear programme of Iran has been diverted towards military purposes. Everything stated in the report is based on pure guess and conjecture. While the IAEA Director-General himself does not say anything for sure, The Pioneer has gone a step ahead and stated that the military dimensions of the Iranian nuclear programme “are no longer in doubt”. This report has raised issues which have long back been responded to. But according to some Indian experts, this report has raked up the Iranian nuclear issue. Iran has signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty and is committed to implement the same honestly. All the nuclear activities of Iran have thoroughly been in accordance to the rules and regulations of this treaty and under complete supervision of the IAEA. The Agency has installed numerous cameras at the Iranian nuclear installations which are busy filming all the activities there 24 hours 365 days a year. All material produced there is sealed by the IAEA. During the last eight years the IAEA has performed intensive inspections stretching over 4,000 man hours. Iran has always welcomed the IAEA inspectors. Please let us know which other country in the world has done the same. Is Israel ready to do even a fraction of that? Moreover, Iran, unlike any other country in the world, has got an additional and more important commitment towards not building atomic weapons. This additional commitment comes out of a fatwa of Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran, who has declared atomic weapons as haram (prohibited). In Islam a fatwa is the most stringent prohibition and for Muslims its sanctity is even more than conventional national and international laws. In this way, Iran is unique and a frontrunner in the whole world in the field of not building atomic weapons. It should also be added that no religious scholar in the world has ever issued such a progressive and peace-heralding fatwa. The unreasonable, non-transparent, biased, double and selective attitude of the arrogant powers in international organisations would result in harming the prestige and usefulness of these international bodies. By exerting political and financial influence they do not permit these organisations to perform their normal and technical duties which would disappoint the countries of the world about the utility of international bodies. The writer is the Chief of Press at the Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Iran, New Delhi http://www.dailypioneer.com/pioneer-news/letters-to-editor/23548-iranian-fatwa-prohibits-nuclear-bomb.html (Return to Articles and Documents List)

New York Times

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

OPINION/Op-Ed Contributor November 28, 2011 The Real Lesson of Iraq By MALFRID BRAUT-HEGGHAMMER Parallels between Iraq’s former nuclear weapons program and the Iranian nuclear program have shaped policy debates for nearly a decade. We are still paying the costs of failing in Iraq. Israel now seems determined to make similar mistakes in Iran. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu now claims that the real Iranian threat is hidden from view, and that it is necessary to act before the window of opportunity closes for good. His solution is straightforward: a targeted strike. Many will agree with the diagnosis, even if they are reluctant to support the proposed solution. However, these claims are misleading on historical and logical grounds. Let us start with history. Netanyahu’s recent statements about the Iranian nuclear program mirror the arguments that were made about Iraq’s alleged nuclear weapons program before the 2003 invasion. Netanyahu claims that the International Atomic Energy Agency’s report of Nov. 8 does not reveal the full scope of the Iranian nuclear threat, as it only contains information that the agency can independently verify. Two implications follow from this statement. First, the I.A.E.A.’s judgment is not trustworthy. Instead, we must rely on intelligence assessments whose sources cannot be verified. Second, the real Iranian threat is not their known enrichment capacity: their apparent efforts to hide information and bury facilities underground constitute evidence of a growing threat. Such logic played a key role in bringing about the U.S.-led war in Iraq in 2003. Following extensive Iraqi concealment of their past weapons of mass destruction programs between 1991 and 1995, international organizations and intelligence agencies began to assume that what could not be verified was hidden. Furthermore, the U.N. investigation of the so-called Iraqi concealment mechanism contributed to Iraq’s expulsion of U.N. inspectors in late 1998. After the 2003 war, we discovered that Iraq’s smoke and mirrors amounted to just that — there was no trace of a smoking gun. As it turned out, the I.A.E.A.’s 1997 assessment was correct: Iraq’s nuclear weapons program had been dismantled shortly after the 1991 Gulf War. The I.A.E.A.’s recent assessment of Iran’s nuclear program judges that Iran studied several applications of a weapons program prior to 2004. It suggests that Iran is slowly moving closer to a nuclear capability. However, the report does not contain a smoking gun. Netanyahu’s proposed solution for dealing with Iran — a targeted attack — also builds on a historical lesson from Iraq. Unfortunately, it is the wrong lesson. In 1981, Israeli pilots destroyed an Iraqi nuclear reactor complex as it stood on the verge of becoming operational. As Avner Cohen, an expert on nuclear weapons, recently wrote in Haaretz, this decision resulted from Prime Minister Menachem Begin’s flawed interpretation of intelligence. (His decision was strongly opposed by Shimon Peres, then defense minister and deputy prime minister.) Israelis tend to credit this attack for denying Iraq a nuclear weapons capability. However, sources that have emerged since 2003 demonstrate that the attack created an unprecedented Iraqi consensus about the need for a nuclear deterrent and triggered a more intensive effort to acquire them. By the 1991 Gulf War, Iraq stood on the threshold of a nuclear weapons capability. What is known about Iran’s nuclear program suggests an attack could have similar consequences. Iran’s erratic nuclear advances over the past decade suggest that there is no consensus about whether and when to develop a nuclear weapons capability. While it is possible that Iran could develop fissile material for a nuclear weapon within

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530 weeks or months, such a high-risk move would require a consensus that does not currently exist in Tehran. Instead, Iran is edging closer toward a nuclear weapons option. An attack is one of the very few events that could create consensus in Tehran that it is necessary to develop nuclear weapons sooner rather than later. Netanyahu further claims that it is necessary to strike against Iran now because it may not be possible to carry out such an attack once the underground Fordow enrichment facility is fully operational. That argument obscures a simple fact: a military strike will make this problem more difficult to deal with in the long term. In the case of Iraq, fears of what was presumed to be hidden distracted analysts and decision-makers from the facts on the ground. In the case of Iran, facts on the ground suggest that the best course of action is to resist the temptation of pushing the red button. A more logical course of action would be to focus efforts on ensuring that Iran will abstain from crossing the nuclear weapons threshold. In fact, this is the most likely outcome if Iran is not attacked. An Iranian nuclear test would entail further isolation from the international community, which Tehran could ill afford. Not striking against Iran would be the better containment policy. Malfrid Braut-Hegghammer is an assistant professor at the Norwegian Defense University College, Oslo. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/29/opinion/the-real-lesson-of-iraq.html?_r=1 (Return to Articles and Documents List)

The Telegraph – U.K. OPINION/Telegraph View Enemy of Iranian state Telegraph View: The expulsion of Britain’s ambassador to Iran has provided a vivid insight into the mindset of the Islamic regime. By Telegraph View 28 November 2011 By urging the expulsion of Britain’s ambassador, Iran’s parliament has provided a vivid insight into the mindset of the Islamic Republic’s leadership. Their first thought as they retreat further into isolation and economic malaise is to credit Britain with prime responsibility for all their problems. For over a century, British statecraft was indeed the dominant factor in Iranian politics, causing the downfall of leaders who were thought to threaten London’s interests. But the era when a string of Royal Navy bases guaranteed that the Gulf was a British lake ended several generations ago. However, the old men who misrule Iran still claim to detect a British hand behind every significant event. The latest trigger for their suspicion appears to have been the Treasury’s (overdue) decision to exclude Iran from transactions with the UK financial system. Meanwhile, another round of UN sanctions is approaching as Iran’s efforts to acquire nuclear weapons capability become increasingly obvious. While the regime may well ignore the parliamentary vote, it clearly believes that Britain will be the guiding force behind this diplomatic drive. When millions marched in Tehran to protest against Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s victory in the rigged elections of 2009, that too was blamed on the British. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the obdurate “Supreme Leader”, claimed on that occasion that Britain was the regime’s “greatest enemy”. Perhaps we should rejoice in the status that all this accords us. Perception can amount to reality in international affairs, so the fact that Iran vastly overestimates our national power should cause us to be more assertive. And if Tehran’s ossified, brutal leaders regard us as their foremost opponent, that is an honour indeed. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/8919734/Enemy-of-Iranian-state.html

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

(Return to Articles and Documents List)

Washington Times OPINION/Commentary FEULNER: Meeting the Missile Threat Nuclear proliferation makes inaction irresponsible By Ed Feulner, The Washington Times Monday, November 28, 2011 With Russian President Dmitry Medvedev issuing threats about America’s planned missile defense for Europe, it may be time to remind the Obama administration why we need such defenses in the first place - in Europe and elsewhere. Plainly put, we live in a dangerous world, and we need to do everything possible to remain safe. Iran and North Korea are trying to acquire the ability to target us and our allies with ballistic missiles tipped with nuclear weapons. And they’re not alone: North Korea has provided such technology to other hostile nations, including Syria. Do you think the Middle East is a powder keg now? Imagine a state like Syria equipped with nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them. Hello, World War III. President Obama is still wedded to his “reset” strategy with Russia. But the fact that our efforts to shield ourselves from catastrophic attack are upsetting Moscow pales next to the folly of remaining needlessly vulnerable. So even as we work to keep rogue states from obtaining the ultimate weapon, we can’t neglect the need to protect ourselves in a worst-case scenario. Indeed, a missile shield could do much to prevent the Irans and North Koreas of the world from acquiring such weapons. After all, why go to the trouble and expense of building them if you know they’re unlikely to succeed? It wouldn’t be practical. So missile defense, besides bolstering our security considerably, can help keep the world from becoming a more volatile place. Some critics may still insist that missile defense isn’t technologically feasible. Actually, the science has advanced to the point where this argument doesn’t hold water. Test after test has shown that you can, in fact, “hit a bullet with a bullet.” And if you couldn’t, why would our adversaries be so dead set on stopping us? Why not sit back and let us pursue a pipe dream? Because they know what the critics don’t: Missile defense works. And it means they won’t be gaining the upper hand. Besides, in a post-Sept. 11 world, it’s irresponsible to rely only on deterrence anymore. During the Cold War, you could get away with “Mutually Assured Destruction.” Neither the United States nor the Soviet Union was about to launch an attack guaranteed to invite major retaliation. But with states ruled by unpredictable leaders and terrorist camps racing to become nuclear powers, such a policy would be more “MAD” than ever. As Baker Spring and Michaela Bendikova explain in a recent Heritage Foundation paper, we need a three-step plan to ensure we get a missile defense able to do the job: 1) Improve the Navy’s Aegis-based missile defense system. Here we would be building on working technology - technology that has already proven itself in the field on the Navy’s Aegis ships. The system has been modified so that it can shoot down short- to intermediate-range ballistic missiles and detect and track ballistic missiles of all ranges. The next step is to adjust it so it can shoot down long-range ballistic missiles in the late “midcourse” stage of flight. 2) Build a layered missile defense. We need a network with land, sea, air and space capabilities. That means locating sensors throughout the world and in space. It also means we have to increase the number of interceptors

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530 we have to counter long-range missiles. With a layered system, our chances of destroying an incoming missile are greatly increased. 3) Develop space-based interceptors. “All but the very shortest-range ballistic missiles travel through space,” Mr. Spring and Ms. Bendikova write. “Thus, the most capable missile defense system would locate interceptors where the missiles would fly - in space.” There’s no excuse to delay or shortchange our ability to defend ourselves as fully as possible. We need an immediate and comprehensive missile defense. With it, we can deprive our enemies of a powerful weapon. What are we waiting for? Ed Feulner is president of the Heritage Foundation (heritage.org). http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/nov/28/meeting-the-missile-threat/ (Return to Articles and Documents List)

The Star – Malaysia OPINION/Analysis Analysis: For Iran, the Sanctions Price May Be Worth Paying By Fredrik Dahl Tuesday, November 29, 2011 VIENNA (Reuters) - Iran regards its nuclear program as a source of power and prestige and tougher sanctions look unlikely to alter Tehran's cost-benefit analysis much despite the economic pain they cause. Deep mistrust of Western intentions and security concerns in a volatile region where the United States maintains a strong military presence could help explain Iran's resolve not to back down and curb nuclear work its foes fear has weapons aims. That determination may have been further reinforced by the fall in August of Libya's Muammar Gaddafi, who agreed in 2003 to abandon efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction only to be toppled after his people rose up and Western powers turned against him. Iran is facing a new wave of punitive measures after a United Nations nuclear watchdog report this month lent independent weight to suspicions, rejected by Tehran, that it has been developing a capability to make atomic bombs. "Iran's nuclear program is motivated by regime survival," said international policy analyst Alireza Nader of RAND Corporation, a U.S.-based research group. "It appears the Islamic Republic has made the calculation that a potential nuclear weapons capability is worth the price of sanctions, as long as sanctions do not imperil the regime." If that is the case, the latest push by the United States and its European allies may do little to force a change of course by Iran in the long-running nuclear dispute, which has the potential to trigger a wider conflict in the Middle East. "The mere fact that Iran is ready to bear the brunt of increasingly painful sanctions demonstrates that they are entrenching themselves in a siege mentality, ready for a showdown if need be," said Bruno Tertrais, a senior research fellow at France's Strategic Research Foundation think tank. European Union foreign ministers meet on Thursday to discuss new sanctions on Tehran, after the United States, Canada and Britain last week announced measures against Iran's energy and financial sectors.

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

Iranian leaders are responding in a characteristically defiant manner to the latest such measures to target the major oil producer, which is already subject to four rounds of U.N. sanctions as well as separate U.S. and European steps. RESISTING WESTERN "DOMINANCE" In a sign of Iran's uncompromising stance, a bill to downgrade ties with London won final legislative approval on Monday, compelling the government to expel Britain's ambassador in retaliation for the new sanctions on Tehran. "The escalating pressure only increases opposition in Iran to enter dialogue or to retreat from its positions as it would show weakness that they believe could be exploited by the West," a senior Western diplomat in the Iranian capital said. Political power struggles make it "in practice impossible" for Iranian leaders to show more flexibility as they would risk being attacked by their domestic rivals, the envoy added. The United States and its European partners seized on the November 8 report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which said Iran appeared to have worked on designing a nuclear weapon, to try to further isolate the country. It also sparked renewed speculation that Israel, which sees Iran's nuclear program as an existential threat, might launch pre-emptive strikes against its atomic sites. Iran dismissed the report by the Vienna-based U.N. nuclear watchdog, which also said that secret weapons- relevant research may continue, as based on forged evidence. It says its nuclear program is a peaceful bid to generate electricity. Iran can draw some comfort from Russian and Chinese opposition to further sanctions against a country with which they share substantial commercial ties, blunting the impact of harsher Western measures. Iran's leaders "find political gain is being able to survive U.S.-led pressure," Mark Fitzpatrick, a director of the International Institute for Strategic Studies think tank, said. Tehran's thinking appears in part shaped by deep-rooted suspicions that its enemies ultimately want the overthrow of the country's system of Islamic clerical rule, established after the 1979 revolution that toppled the U.S.-backed shah. "Threats of a military option or regime change only reinforce their determination to resist," Fitzpatrick said. Standing up against Western demands offers the conservative leadership a chance to rally nationalist support and distract attention from the economic woes many people are experiencing. "The nuclear program has morphed into the ultimate expression of Iran's resistance to Western dominance and an 'unjust' international system," said Ali Vaez of the Federation of American Scientists, a Washington-based think tank. Tightening sanctions also risk, however, fuelling domestic discontent that erupted after a disputed 2009 election and that the authorities used force to suppress. Whether they "result in a popular uprising against the government is a matter of speculation which has been prompted by the revolts in North Africa and the Middle East," said Mark Hibbs of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. VIRTUAL NUCLEAR POWER? The United States says the drive it leads to isolate Iran has slowed its nuclear program and that there is still time to persuade it to abandon atomic weapons ambitions.

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530

But despite sanctions and suspected sabotage, Iran is pressing ahead with work that it says is for a planned network of power plants but experts say could also be used for bombs. Iran's current stockpile of low-enriched uranium would be sufficient for at least two nuclear bombs if refined much further and it is preparing to shift its most sensitive enrichment activity to an underground bunker. Iran's nuclear activities are geared toward providing it with the option to build atomic weapons so that "it can get some perceived security benefits and prestige from being on the cusp of joining the nuclear club," said Peter Crail of the Arms Control Association, a U.S.-based research and advocacy group. Diplomatic efforts to resolve the row have stalled after a fruitless meeting in Istanbul in January between Iranian officials and representatives of the six major powers - the United States, Russia, France, Germany, China and Britain. Both sides say they are ready to resume talks, but Iran insists it will never suspend uranium enrichment as demanded by repeated United Nations Security Council resolutions. Its leaders risk looking weak if they retreat but stand to gain "respect and coercive power that comes along with being a virtual nuclear power" if they persist, said Henry Sokolski of the U.S.-based Nonproliferation Policy Education Center. In the search for a possible way forward, the West may have to accept that Iran continues some enrichment, in return for more intrusive IAEA inspections to make sure there are no military links to its program, analysts say. "If there is a negotiated solution to this crisis, the outcome would likely be an Iran which is enriching uranium and has gone some of the way toward having a nuclear weapons capability," Carnegie's Hibbs said. Editing by Mark Heinrich http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2011/11/30/worldupdates/2011-11- 29T145133Z_4_TRE7AS0WZ_RTROPTT_0_UK-NUCLEAR-IRAN&sec=Worldupdates (Return to Articles and Documents List)

Issue No. 960, 29 November 2011 United States Air Force Counterproliferation Research & Education | Maxwell AFB, Montgomery AL Phone: 334.953.7538 | Fax: 334.953.7530