Following an August 3 report in the Wall Street Journal, the arms control blogosphere has been buzzing about a nearly finalized nuclear cooperation agreement between the United States and Vietnam. According to the Journal, and now other outlets including The Guardian and Global Security Newswire , the U.S.-Vietnam deal has considerably weaker proliferation controls than the Obama administration has demanded in the past – specifically, the agreement would allow Vietnam to retain the right to enrich uranium.

The Risks and Benefits of Enrichment

Uranium enrichment technology has both civil and military applications: it can be used to produce fuel for nuclear power plants or fissile material for nuclear weapons. Any country that possesses enrichment facilities would be able to use this technology to jumpstart a weapons program. But any country without enrichment facilities is unable to independently produce nuclear fuel for its reactors and thus required to import fuel for its nuclear energy program.

Read more

Nukes on a Blog, Security Matters, Obama Administration (all tags)

An advisory panel to Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan is poised to recommend that Japan reevaluate its Three Non-Nuclear Principles, report the Asahi Shimbun, Global Security Newswire, and Bloomberg. The three principles, which comprise some of the most stringent anti-nuclear legislation in the world, have guided Japanese nuclear policy since the 1960s. The principles forbid the possession and production of nuclear weapons by Japan as well as the introduction of foreign nuclear arms into Japanese territory.  

Arguing that “it may not necessarily be wise to have as a principle anything that unilaterally limits what the United States can do,” the panel’s report calls for a review of the third principle’s ban on introducing American arms into Japan. This recommendation comes on the heels of government admissions that the third principle had been violated secretly throughout the Cold War. Even given recent revelations about Cold War secret agreements, however, official governmental approval for the introduction of nuclear arms into Japan would carry significant domestic and international political repercussions.

Read more

Nukes on a Blog, Security Matters (all tags)

EADS North America and Boeing remain to duke it out.

Come on, you know the end…  Well, if U.S. Aerospace didn’t know the end before, they certainly do now.

Late is unacceptable.

After their late delivery (by five minutes) of an already last minute bid for the KC-X tanker contract, U.S. Aerospace has filed a complaint with the GAO.  Since the tanker competition clearly needed an extra dose of juvenile behavior, the California-based firm has claimed that U.S. Air Force officials:

… may have intentionally delayed the messenger from delivering our proposal, in order to create a pretext for refusing to consider it because they have political issues with our Eastern European supplier, thus violating the requirement that the program be a fair and equal competition, open to all qualified bidders.

Or… they could have just rejected the hastily thrown together proposal on its merits, but I suppose that’s an unfair assumption…

The company includes a very detailed explanation for their tardiness:

Our proposal was hand delivered on July 9, 2010. The messenger arrived at the government installation, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, well before 1:30 pm, more than half an hour before the 2:00 pm deadline. Air Force personnel initially denied the messenger entry to the base, then gave incorrect directions to 1755 Eleventh Street Building 570, and finally instructed the messenger to wait where he was for Air Force personnel to come and get him. He at all times complied with the instructions of Air Force personnel, from the time he arrived at the installation until the proposal was taken by Air Force personnel at the program building. Although the proposal was arbitrarily marked received at 2:05 pm, it was under Air Force control before the bid deadline.

I wonder… did the dog eat the first copy too?

Read more

Security Matters, Defense Spending, KC-X (all tags)

Iran’s semi-official Fars news agency allegedly reported Wednesday that Tehran has acquired “four S-300 surface-to-air missile systems”.  Iran apparently acquired two “S-300 from Belarus and two others from another unspecified source”, with Fars adding, "Iran possesses four S-300 PT missiles.”  The news comes following June reports that suggested the seemingly never-ending saga between Russia and Iran over the sale of the S-300 PMU1 air defense system had finally come to a close - as a result of a recent tightening of UN sanctions.

As explained before, if Iran really did acquire the much touted S-300 PMU-1, it would make an air attack of its controversial nuclear program a lot harder.  However, from looking at the Fars report in more detail and the context in which it was released, it seems that there are a number of issues which cast doubt on the credibility of the notion Iran has acquired a robust S-300 air defense system from Belarus.

In terms of the detail of the report, there is firstly no elaboration on what is meant with regards to the "four S-300 surface-to-air missile systems".  Indeed, does the wording refer to launchers or batteries?   One battery of S-300 PMU1’s, the system that Iran was trying to buy from Russia, consists of up to 12 semi-trailer erector-launchers (TEL) which mount four tubular missile container-launchers and a launcher complex of several other components, detailed photographically here.  Should this report merely infer that Iran has acquired four launchers, then there is little for any would-be aerial attacker to worry about.  Indeed, even with a launcher complex, four TELs would only ever be able to provide a highly limited air defense....

Read more

Iran, S-300, missiles, Security Matters, Iran Watch (all tags)

It was reported at the end of last month that China successfully shot down one of its redundant satellites in January.    Allegedly, the firing took place at nearly the same time as a successful Chinese missile interception test conducted on January 11.   Given the reaction to its 2007 launch, some observers have suggested that the recent launch may have been ordered as a means for Beijing to vent displeasure over recent Taiwanese efforts to buy the Patriot missile defense system from the U.S.  However, others claim that the time needed to prepare for such a launch makes this notion unlikely.  Either way, the news is further evidence of continuing Chinese efforts to boost their space based military capabilities, and given the outcry following the last test, has probably not been met with cheers from countries possessing satellite capabilities.

In context of this news, Beijing’s official position on space might come as a surprise to some:

“The Chinese government has all along regarded the space industry as an integral part of the state's comprehensive development strategy, and upheld that the exploration and utilization of outer space should be for peaceful purposes and benefit the whole of mankind.”

China’s official position is probably guided by the concerns over the prospect of space based missile defense systems which might one day render its relatively few numbers of ICBMs useless.  However, just as in 2007, China risks losing legitimacy in this regard when it destroys its own satellites....

Read more

China, satellite, Security Matters (all tags)

Two months after the Senate first passed their version of the war supplemental, the House passed the final version of the bill yesterday, 308-114.  Now all that stands between the military and a delicious $37.1 billion is the stroke of President Obama’s pen, coming in the next few days.

We’ve reported on this bill twice already, tracking its progress through Congress.  

A quick recap:

The Senate version of the bill, passed May 27, contained $58.8 billion in spending, including $37.1 billion for the war, over $13 billion for Vietnam veterans exposed to Agent Orange, $5.1 billion for FEMA, and $2.9 billion for Haiti disaster relief, as well as a host of smaller expenditures.

The House then passed its version of the bill on July 1, which accepted the Senate version while adding $22.8 billion in spending fully offset by $23.5 billion in cuts and law modifications.  This included a $10 billion education jobs fund, $1 billion for youth summer jobs, $5 billion in Pell grants, $4.6 billion to settle two class-action lawsuits, and $701 million for border security.

Read more

Security Matters, Iraq & Afghanistan, Defense Spending, War supplemental, Congress (all tags)

Update 7/28/10: The House approved the war supplemental later on Tuesday by a vote of 308-114. Obey was among the nays.

As the House nears a vote on the war supplemental, House Appropriations Chairman David Obey says he will not vote for the bill.

“I would be willing to support additional war funding – provided that Congress would vote – up or down – explicitly on whether or not to continue this policy after a new National Intelligence Estimate is produced. But absent that discipline, I cannot look my constituents in the eye and say that this operation will hurt our enemies more than us.”

Since President Obama first requested $33 billion in supplemental fiscal 2010 funds for the Pentagon in February, Congress’ concerns about the war in Afghanistan have increased.  Not helping, of course, is the recent leak of over 90,000 internal military documents detailing the war… the night before the vote.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer stated that despite concerns about the war in Afghanistan, members should vote for the funding bill.

“We may want to reconsider [the mission of the U.S. forces serving in Iraq and Afghanistan], but the fact is those troops are there now.”

Read more

Security Matters, Defense Spending, Iraq & Afghanistan, Congress (all tags)

As the tension builds, with a few even speculating that neither the C-17 nor the F-35 extra engine will make it in to final fiscal 2011 defense appropriations, things have heated up at the Farnborough International Airshow, taking place from July 19-25 in the UK.

Dave Hess, president of Pratt & Whitney, the manufacturer of the current F-35 engine, acknowledged at the show that his company was actively lobbying lawmakers on the issue.  He insisted, though, that the rival team of General Electric and Rolls Royce are spending “orders of magnitude” more.

While he acknowledged that the issue is an “enormous priority” for both GE and Rolls, Jean Lydon-Rodgers, president of GE Aviation's military business and former head of the GE-Rolls engine team, rejected Pratt’s criticism as “unfair”.

Boeing and EADS also took their show on the road, each touting the size of their orders.  Bids for the $35 billion KC-X tanker contract have closed and a decision is due in November.

As the Pentagon’s belt gets tighter and tighter, the fierce competition for contracts is reaching a fever pitch.  PACs associated with both Lockheed and Boeing are on track to make record-level campaign contributions this election cycle, with each already well over the $2 million mark.  Both have already maxed out contributions to several lawmakers, as well as to party committees.

Read more

Security Matters, Defense Spending, C-17, F-35 (all tags)

The United States and South Korea announced a series of joint naval exercises in the Pacific theater on Tuesday, designed to show force and resolve against a stubborn North Korea.  The first of the exercises will begin Sunday and will include ships, aircraft, sailors, and airmen (for a total of about 8,000 personnel) from both the US and Republic of Korea navy and air force.

The display is a direct response to and a continuation of the crisis begun when the South Korean frigate Cheonan was sunk off the coast of the Korean Peninsula on March 26.  An international investigation team concluded that the Cheonan was hit by a torpedo launched from a North Korean submarine, a charge North Korea and its ally, China, have denied.

The statement said that the exercises “are designed to send a clear message to North Korea that its aggressive behavior must stop.”  They will occur in both the East and West Seas, known to Americans as Yellow Sea and the Sea of Japan.

The military presence is quite large, with over a hundred aircraft and 20 ships and submarines, including the American aircraft carrier the USS George Washington.

Read more

Security Matters, North Korea, Navy (all tags)

The directors of Lawrence Livermore, Los Alamos, and Sandia National Laboratories appeared yesterday in front of the Senate Armed Services and Foreign Relations Committees, testifying that the New START Treaty would not prevent the labs from ensuring the safety, security, and reliability of the U.S. nuclear deterrent. The directors head the three labs that carry out the NNSA’s (National Nuclear Security Administration) stockpile stewardship program. The three directors were joined by Dr. Roy Schwitters, the Chairman of the JASON Defense Advisory Group, at the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing.

Read more

Nukes on a Blog, New START, Congress, Security Matters (all tags)