Government Executive - Authors - Rachel Oswald

Air Force Defends Shielding Nuclear Force from Service Cutbacks

Rachel Oswald, National Journal — Thu, 31 Jul 2014 15:54:49 -0400

Air Force brass on Wednesday defended their decision to spare nuclear-arms personnel from the force cutbacks happening in other parts of the service.

The Air Force announced in June that it had decided to retain 4,000 airmen working in the nuclear mission who would otherwise have faced possible involuntary separation from the service. In explaining the decision, Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James said it wasnecessary to have "full manning in our nuclear positions" because of the "vital importance of this mission." Earlier this spring, the secretary told the Air Force Times that due to budget constraints the service intended to reduce its active-duty force by 16,700 personnel in the next fiscal year.

At a Pentagon press conference, James said it was necessary for the Air Force to prioritize its missions. "Nuclear is number one. And people need to understand that," she was quoted as saying in an official transcript.

The Air Force this year has publicly shown more concern for its strategic deterrence mission, after a number of scandals highlighted low morale and a lack of professionalism by some airmen assigned to maintain, operate and protect the service's arsenal of strategic nuclear-tipped missiles.

Official investigations and independent analysis of the problem concluded that a number of missileers perceived that the nuclear arms mission had become a lower priority for service leaders, as evidenced, for example, by the lack of attention being given to their degrading support infrastructure.

"We're shifting resources and we're shifting personnel," James said on Wednesday. "The personnel aren't all there on station yet, but they'll be coming."

The Air Force in June said it was redirecting $50 million in fiscal 2014 funds toward the immediate rehabilitation of the infrastructure that nuclear airmen rely on. The money also would help to address certain "people issues," according to the service.

]]>

Senate Confirms Creedon for NNSA No. 2 Position

Rachel Oswald, Global Security Newswire — Wed, 23 Jul 2014 17:53:35 -0400

The U.S. Senate on Wednesday confirmed Madelyn Creedon to become the No. 2 official at the National Nuclear Security Administration.

As NNSA principal deputy administrator, Creedon will work directly under Energy Undersecretary for Nuclear Security Frank Klotz, according to an agency press release. She will assist in the management of the U.S. atomic weapons complex and work on Energy policy initiatives in support of the Obama administration's nuclear nonproliferation goals.

The National Nuclear Security Administration is a semi-autonomous branch of the Energy Department.

"Madelyn Creedon's confirmation comes at a critical point for the National Nuclear Security Administration," Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz said in a statement. "She is well prepared for her new role at the department ... and I thank the Senate for their attention to Madelyn's nomination and, look forward to working with her."

Creedon was nominated in November.

She most recently served as assistant secretary of Defense for global strategic affairs. Creedon is also a former Senate Armed Services Committee staffer and a former NNSA deputy administrator for defense programs.

Creedon is rejoining the agency at a particularly busy time. NNSA officials are simultaneously working to modernize decades-old fissile material production facilities, settle on a plan for disposing of surplus Soviet-era plutonium, and overhaul aging nuclear warheads during a period of heightened congressional scrutiny andtightened federal spending.

]]>

Progress Hard to Gauge on Homeland Antimissile Program

Rachel Oswald, Global Security Newswire — Tue, 22 Jul 2014 16:46:13 -0400

Congressional auditors are complaining that a dearth of data is making it difficult to judge progress in improving a key homeland antimissile system.

The Pentagon was ordered under a 2013 law to report to Congress on specific efforts it was taking to improve the performance of the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense system -- the country's principal shield against a limited intercontinental ballistic missile strike. Pentagon officials eventually delivered the assessment in February, seven months late.

But while the document lists past and planned actions aimed at technological enhancements in the program, it fails to adequately explain how those steps would work in bringing about improvements to the system's performance, the Government Accountability Office said in an assessment released last week.

This lack of important contextual information, auditors said, is problematic for congressional defense panels' ability to perform oversight of the GMD program, which finally scored a critical intercept win in a June test after years of failures.

"Without an understanding of the effectiveness of these actions and plans, Congress may not have the information it needs when making difficult choices on where to spend limited funds," the GAO report concludes.

For example, the Missile Defense Agency informed Congress that it had upgraded the software of all first- and second-generation kinetic kill vehicles deployed on interceptors under the GMD system. However, the agency "did not describe the effectiveness of these improvements or whether these improvements have been confirmed to work as intended in flight tests," reads the report.

Additionally, while the Missile Defense Agency discussed its plans to create a better system for estimating interceptors' reliability, the agency failed to disclose how the new methodology would actually be put in place, according to auditors.

Other gaps in information include the continued lack of a timeline for finalizing a new Ground Based Interceptor acquisition strategy. This comes in spite of the fact that the Pentagon would need such a strategy before it begins the process of purchasing 14 more interceptors for deployment in Alaska in fiscal 2018, the GAO report says.

]]>

Los Alamos Gets 'Inadequate' Safety Rating from Energy Dept.

Rachel Oswald, Global Security Newswire — Wed, 16 Jul 2014 17:19:06 -0400

The Energy Department has given a key weapons lab an "inadequate" rating for its latest safety record on "nuclear criticality," a measure of atomic stability.

Los Alamos National Laboratory received the weakest nuclear criticality safety rating of all U.S. nuclear weapons laboratories, though its performance is assessed to be getting better, according to a report released last week covering fiscal 2013. Deputy Energy Secretary Daniel Poneman submitted the assessment to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.

Nuclear criticality typically refers to a balance of neutrons in a reactor, with "subcriticality" suggesting underproduction and "supercriticality" suggesting overproduction. Nuclear criticality safety is the practice of preventing atomic chain reactions from taking place in fissile materials outside of reactors.

The Los Alamos facility in New Mexico had 38 nuclear criticality safety infractions in the last fiscal year and received an overall performance rating of "does not meet expectations."

"Operations in the main plutonium facility at LANL were paused in June 2013," the 75-page annual report states. "Resumption from the pause will occur on an operation-by-operation basis once the associated procedures are validated from a conduct of operations perspective, criticality controls are verified to be adequate and flowed into procedures, and operators trained."

The National Nuclear Security Administration "in general" has had "difficulty hiring and retaining qualified criticality safety staff," with Los Alamos and the Y-12 National Security Site experiencing more difficulties in that arena than other weapon sites, according to the report. The Y-12 complex, located in Tennessee, received an "adequate" performance rating, even though it had 71 infractions.

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California had the highest rating of any of the sites. The California complex's overall safety performance was judged "excellent," with only one criticality safety infraction occurring in the last fiscal year.

The Nevada National Security Site's overall performance was described as "adequate, but does not fully meet requirements," though it recorded just one minor infraction. Sandia National Laboratory in New Mexico was given a safety rating of "adequate," with no infractions reported since fiscal 2009. Meantime, the Pantex Plant in Texas also was given an "adequate" safety grade, with no infractions reported in more than 20 years.

]]>

Global Strike Command Adds New Job Type to Address Missileer Woes

Rachel Oswald, Global Security Newswire — Wed, 02 Jul 2014 17:30:00 -0400

After several nuclear-sector lapses, U.S. Air Force Global Strike Command is creating a new position designed as a conduit between missileers and commanders.

Each of the nine missile squadrons of the 20th Air Force will get its own assistant director of operations, or "ADOs," before summer's end, according to a Tuesday command press release. The assistant director will be a middle-management position charged with supporting command leadership in its efforts to direct junior nuclear personnel responsible for maintaining, operating and protecting the country's arsenal of Minuteman 3 intercontinental ballistic missiles.

Maj. Scott Fleming, who will become one of the first assistant directors of operations, said the decision to prioritize creation of the position came out of the command's ongoing Force Improvement Program. The initiative was launched in February to address a number of professionalism and morale problems within the nuclear missileer force that were brought to light in the last year.

"I'm glad to see they are pursuing this," Fleming said in released comments. "Historically in the ICBM units, there has been a large gap between the leadership level and those pulling the duty out there in the field. If you look at the bomber units and most of the flying units, it's not quite set up that way. They have more mid-level management and leadership from ADOs who are able to bridge that gap."

Lt. Col. Steven Folds of the 20th Air Force said he was optimistic that the new operations officers would be helpful in translating the orders of commanders into a language that young personnel in their first assignments and enlisted crews could understand.

"They will also ensure appropriate training is accomplished for all crew members under their charge and will direct additional training as those needs are identified," he said.

]]>

Federal Grants Bring New Cash to Local Emergency-Response Efforts

Rachel Oswald, Global Security Newswire — Wed, 02 Jul 2014 13:20:37 -0400

State and local efforts to improve public-health responses to a potential unconventional attack on U.S. soil are getting another infusion of federal funding.

The Health and Human Services Department announced on Tuesday that it was awarding more than $840 million in fiscal 2014 grants to state and community public-health programs that could be called on in the event of a naturally occurring disease epidemic, or a biological, chemical or nuclear attack.

"Community and state preparedness is essential to the health security of all Americans," Nicole Lurie, HHS assistant secretary for preparedness and response, said in provided remarks. "Events in the last few years have demonstrated how critical it is for health systems across the country to be ready and able to respond quickly and effectively."

The grants are being disbursed through two different programs: the Public Health Emergency Preparedness initiative, which supports efforts by laboratories and researchers to contain disease outbreaks, and the Hospital Preparedness Program, which works to improve coordination among different medical centers for responding to possible large-scale emergencies.

The hospital-readiness effort is getting $228.5 million for the current fiscal year. In comparison, the initiative received $332 million in fiscal 2013 and $352 million in fiscal 2012, according to previous reporting. The Public Health Emergency Preparedness program is to receive nearly $612 million in fiscal 2014. That compares to $584 million in fiscal 2013 and $619 million in fiscal 2012.

(Image via Christopher Penler / Shutterstock.com)

]]>

Audit Questions Savings in Pentagon Plan to Cut Strategic Command, Other Senior Staff

Rachel Oswald, Global Security Newswire — Mon, 30 Jun 2014 17:10:51 -0400

A Pentagon plan to cut costs by reducing senior staff at Strategic Command and other military headquarters may not produce significant savings, an audit says.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel last year ordered across-the-board reductions of 20 percent of the budget of all military command headquarters. Congress directed its Government Accountability Office to examine the effects of those directed cuts on the Pentagon's three "functional component commands," which are Strategic Command, Special Operations Command and Transportation Command.

In findings released last Thursday, the analysts said that limiting cuts to just those personnel in management roles at the command organizations would potentially exclude from consideration more than 75 percent of the headquarters positions.

In their 73-page report, auditors "found that less than a quarter of the positions at the functional combatant commands are considered to be management headquarters even though many positions appear to be performing management headquarters functions such as planning, budgeting and developing policies."

The GAO officials concluded the Pentagon does not have "a clear or accurate accounting of the resources being devoted to management headquarters to use as a starting point to track reductions," in part because it relies on self-reported data from the commands, which can be inconsistent.

Strategic Command is responsible for detecting and deterring strategic attacks against the United States and its allies. The Nebraska-based command has combat responsibility over all U.S. ballistic missile submarines, nuclear-capable bombers and intercontinental ballistic missiles.

Currently headed by Adm. Cecil Haney, the command in fiscal 2013 spent $623.4 million supporting its headquarters operations, which cover service component commands such as Air Force Global Strike Command; coordinating centers such as the Center for Combating Weapons of Mass Destruction; and one sub-unified command -- Cyber Command, according to the report. Comparatively, less than $200 million was spent in fiscal 2001 on STRATCOM headquarters activities.

The nuclear command also has seen the number of military and civilian personnel assigned to it and its sub-commands balloon in recent years, rising from fewer than 2,000 people in fiscal 2001 to a total of 4,466 authorized positions in fiscal 2013.

Much of that recent growth can be attributed to the creation in 2009 of Global Strike Command, which was established to address shortcomings in the Air Force's management of its nuclear bomber and ICBM missions. The service component command had just under 600 military and civilian personnel assigned to it in the last fiscal year.

The Pentagon partially agreed with the congressional auditors' recommendation that it reconsider its decision to focus military command cuts to just management positions at headquarters. At the same time, the department argued the recommendation fell outside the scope of the GAO review mandate, which was to examine the resources and personnel assigned to the three functional commands.

]]>

Pentagon Funds Development of New Tech for Detecting 'Dirty Bombs'

Rachel Oswald, Global Security Newswire — Tue, 03 Jun 2014 15:03:31 -0400

With its supply of helium running out, the Pentagon is funding research into alternative methods for detecting the presence of possible "dirty bombs."

Helium 3 gas is employed in most of the nuclear-detection systems in use today. The rare substance is currently produced as a byproduct of the radioactive decay of tritium, a material used in nuclear warheads. As helium 3 is collected from aging warheads, the supply of the gas has dwindled as the U.S. nuclear arsenal has grown smaller.

That has prompted the Pentagon's Defense Threat Reduction Agency to seek out promising new technologies that can supplant the use of helium 3 in detection devices, which are used to find radiological substances. Officials fear that attackers could pair these substances with conventional explosives to disperse harmful radiation across a wide area.

To that end, the agency has awarded a $2.8 million contract to Alion Science and Technology of McLean, Va., to further its research into a next-generation detection system that utilizes bundles of thin copper tubes coated with boron, according to a Monday company press release.

The current generation of helium 3-powered detectors can alert authorities to the presence of a nearby radioactive source, but these systems cannot determine the direction from which the radiation is coming. Alion plans to use its Pentagon funding to give its boron-coated "straw" sensors the ability to pinpoint the direction of a source.

"By researching the means to make the boron-coated straw detector more precise and more reasonable to produce, Alion can help [the Defense Threat Reduction Agency] employ improved technologies to mitigate threats effectively and keep warfighters and citizens safe," company senior vice president Terri Spoonhour said in a released statement. "But, beyond providing a drop-in replacement for He-3 detector components, this engineering effort opens up a number of possibilities for new or enhanced portable systems that can be carried into questionable areas or permanently installed to protect ports and depots."

]]>

Air Force Wants to Boost Global Strike Command's Clout

Rachel Oswald, Global Security Newswire — Fri, 30 May 2014 09:14:36 -0400

The Air Force wants to raise the clout of its strike command as part of its response to a series of ethics lapses in the nuclear sector.

The civilian and military leaders of the service have recommended to Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel that the position of head of Global Strike Command be upgraded to a four-star billet from its current three-star rank, according to a Wednesday Air Force news story. The proposal is to be further developed in the coming months and would require congressional authorization.

Global Strike Command manages the Air Force's fleet of nuclear-capable bombers and its arsenal of roughly 450 Minuteman 3 intercontinental ballistic missiles. The current head of the command is Lt. Gen. Stephen Wilson.

"This important mission in the Air Force deserves the highest level of leadership oversight similar to our other operational core mission areas," Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James said in provided comments.

The service also wants to elevate the position of assistant chief of staff for strategic deterrence and nuclear integration from a two-star to a three-star position. Maj. Gen. Garrett Harencak presently occupies that post.

The envisioned billet upgrades are the latest in a series of steps the Air Force has announced to address what are seen as cultural deficiencies that may have led many nuclear-missile officers at a Montana base to cheat -- or turn a blind eye to cheating -- last year on a routine certification test. The service is also investigating allegations of drug possession by a few Global Strike Command officials.

The ethics scandals touched off a number of internal reviews into the Air Force's nuclear weapons mission. Service brass said they uncovered deep-seated cultural problems among ICBM launch-control officers that they said stemmed, in part, from onerous testing demands and perceptions that the job was a career "backwater."

"This is our most critically important mission and these personnel actions show that," Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Welsh said in a released statement. "And we are not just increasing the rank within the organization, we are also increasing the overall manpower by more than 1,100 personnel to address shortfalls and offer our airmen a more stable work schedule and better quality of life."

Other newly announced personnel changes include adding more mid-level officers to each of Global Strike Command's Minuteman ICBM squadrons and offering bonuses to certain specialists.

The service press release did not provide any estimates on how much it would cost to implement the proposed changes in billets and personnel numbers. "These initiatives will take time. But we're putting our money where our mouth is and aligning resources to go after those initiatives," Wilson was quoted as saying.

James said the Air Force had already redirected $50 million in current fiscal-year funds "to address urgent, near-term nuclear sustainment shortfalls." An additional $350 million from the service's future years defense program also will be redirected to the effort, she said.

Rep. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., whose state hosts a Minuteman 3 missile wing, applauded the planned changes.

"These recommendations ... demonstrate the importance of the ICBM force as part of our nation's nuclear deterrence and the overall defense strategy," Kramer said in a Wednesday statement. "Increasing the level of leadership and introducing retention incentives for high-caliber airmen will enhance accountability and morale. The Air Force has my support and I will do my part to make sure their recommendations are implemented."

]]>

Nuke Agency Rejects Mandate to Provide Cost-Savings Details

Rachel Oswald, Global Security Newswire — Fri, 16 May 2014 17:20:04 -0400

The U.S. nuclear weapons agency is rejecting a finding by auditors that it should know how much money it could save by pursuing certain efficiencies.

The National Nuclear Security Administration was required under the fiscal 2012 defense authorization law to issue a report to Capitol Hill examining areas within its enterprise where it could operate more efficiently and save money by doing so. A Thursday report by the Government Accountability Office found that while the agency's assessment -- eventually delivered to lawmakers in November 2013 -- did highlight seven "opportunities for efficiency," it failed to provide estimates on the cost savings that could be realized with those projects.

The semiautonomous Energy Department branch, in its comments to auditors, disputed the finding that it was required under the 2012 legislation to "casually and quantitatively link its cost efficiency initiatives to specific cost savings."

According to the 25-page audit report, the National Nuclear Security Administration had argued it lacked "reliable information to accurately develop cost estimates" for the initiatives it outlined to Congress.

The auditors disagreed with this contention, noting that, while analytically difficult to develop, a "sound methodology for estimated savings helps ensure that proposed savings can be achieved."

The nuclear agency's spending decisions are currently under the microscope in light of a broader congressional atmosphere of budget-tightening and, more specifically, because NNSA officials in recent years have overseen a number of projects that have far exceeded initial cost projections.

One of the efficiency projects the agency outlined in its report to Congress was the planned Uranium Conversion Facility at the Y-12 National Security Complex in Tennessee. That initiative today is in jeopardydue in part to how much its estimated price tag has risen, skyrocketing from initial projections of no more than $1.1 billion to almost $20 billion.

]]>

A Pass-Fail Exam Is All That Stands Between Air Force Officers and Nuclear Missile Codes

Rachel Oswald, Global Security Newswire — Thu, 24 Apr 2014 13:05:00 -0400

The Air Force is simplifying the way it grades nuclear-missile officers on their monthly exams, the service's top-ranking officer said on Wednesday.

The service has "made the monthly [certification] test pass-fail," Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Welsh said at a Washington event. His remarks come in the wake of a high-profile cheating scandal at a Montana base that revealed a de facto expectation that perfect test scores were needed for advancement up the ranks.

Welsh did not say in his remarks at the National Press Club what percentage of correct answers would be needed to pass the thumbs-up-or-down proficiency tests. It was previously reported that launch-control officers needed a score of at least 90 percent on each exam to maintain authorization to key in a firing code for one of the country's 450 ground-based strategic missiles.

An Air Force investigation into drug-use allegations uncovered cheating on certification tests at Malmstrom Air Force Base, Mont., and resulted in the service earlier this year firing nine mid-level officers at the base for their failure to detect and report the misconduct. Welsh said the wrongdoing involved about 40 percent of each of the 341st Missile Wing's three squadrons.

The missile wing maintains and operates 150 Minuteman 3 intercontinental ballistic missiles. Air Force bases in Wyoming and North Dakota each host an equivalent number of the nuclear-armed missiles.

Service brass have attributed the cheating at Malmstrom to a "culture of perfection" that led missileers to believe their careers would suffer if they did not get test scores of 100 percent. Though officials said they did not uncover any test-taking misconduct at bases in North Dakota and Wyoming, ex-missile launch officers have said cheating has been rampant for years throughout the ICBM officer corps.

"The people who cheated, the people who were breaking the law, who were breaking our rules and policies intentionally, they don't have a future with us. That's not how we operate," Welsh said.

He said the service is working to quickly implement quality-of-life changes for nuclear-missile personnel that were suggested in a recent grassroots survey. Some of those fixes involve empowering lower-level officers to make more decisions.

"We're trying hard to eliminate an idea that you can never make a decision, [that] your most-senior boss always has to be the one making the call," the four-star general said. "There are a lot of things that we need to be doing in that business at the lowest level of authority."

(Image via mighty chiwawa/Shutterstock.com)

]]>

Obama Says GOP Playing 'Political Games' on Benghazi Attacks

Rachel Oswald, Global Security Newswire — Mon, 13 May 2013 15:27:36 -0400

President Obama on Monday accused Republicans in Congress of playing “political games” with their efforts to discredit his administration’s handling of the response to last September’s assault on the U.S. diplomatic station in Benghazi, Libya.

There is growing support in the GOP-dominated House of Representatives for establishing a select committee with subpoena power to investigate accusations that the administration was derelict in its reaction to the Sept. 11 attacks on the diplomatic outpost, which resulted in the deaths of Ambassador Chris Stephens and three other State Department workers.

Republicans accuse the Obama administration of not sending in military backup when it was requested by U.S. diplomats in Libya. The Defense Department has responded that Benghazi was too far away for any U.S. special forces teams to have arrived in time to have changed the outcome.

At a joint White House press conference with visiting British Prime Minister David Cameron, Obama acknowledged that “clearly, [the U.S. State Department personnel in Benghazi] were not in a position where they were adequately protected.”

Obama, however, pushed back strongly against Republican accusations that the State Department altered CIA-prepared talking points in order to minimize the terrorist nature of the assaults. "The whole issue of this -- of talking points, frankly, throughout this process has been a sideshow."

“We don't have time to be playing these kinds of political games here in Washington,” the president said.

Obama said he and Cameron agreed in one-on-one talks earlier in the day to “continue to work to establish the facts around the use of chemical weapons in Syria and those facts will guide our next steps.”

The United States and the United Kingdom in recent weeks have said they are reasonably certain that the Bashar Assad regime has used sarin nerve agent against opposition forces on one or more occasions. Obama last year said chemical attacks in the Syrian civil war would cross a “red line” that would merit a strong but unspecified U.S. response.

The continuing absence of decisive action from Washigton on the purported chemical attacks has led pundits and foreign relations experts to heap criticism on Obama for weakening U.S. credibility. The president, though, has defended his tempered response on the grounds that there is not yet concrete evidence pointing to the deliberate use of chemical weapons and that it is not yet clear exactly who in Syria might have been behind any such attacks.

The Obama administration and partner governments are pushing for a technical U.N. investigation into the reported chemical attacks. That has been stymied for weeks by Damascus' refusal to permit the investigators to enter the country if they do not first agree to limit their probe to just regime allegations of chemical weapons use by opposition forces on the village of Khan al-Assal.

Cameron in an interview with NPR earlier on Monday said the evidence of chemical attacks by Damascus "is growing; the lack of room for doubt is shrinking," according to a Reuters report.

London is using the purported chemical attacks to build a case for amending the European Union arms embargo to Syria to allow the sale of weapons to rebels.

“Britain is pushing for more flexibility in the EU arms embargo,” Cameron told journalists at the White House, adding that his government intends to “double nonlethal support to the Syrian opposition in the coming year. Armored vehicles, body armor and power generators are ripe to be shipped.”

Should the European embargo be amended, Cameron hinted at but did not specifically say his government would provide the Syrian opposition with arms. “I do believe that there's more we can do -- alongside technical advice, assistance, help.”

If moderate Syrian rebels are not provided outside help then there is a strong likelihood that extremist militias in the country will only grow more powerful, the prime minister said. “If we don't work with that part of the opposition, then we shouldn't be surprised if the extremist elements grow.”

]]>

Obama Chemical Weapons ‘Red Line’ for Syria Keeps Shifting, Ex-Official Says

Rachel Oswald, Global Security Newswire — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 15:46:31 -0400

President Obama’s “red line” for U.S. intervention in Syria is actually more of a fuzzy zone whose goalposts keep shifting, said the former top WMD hunter in Iraq.

“It’s a term I particularly don’t like because unless you’re prepared [to carry through] you really do damage to your credibility and the power of our diplomacy because no one believes you,” said David Kay, who from 2003 to 2004 led the Iraq Survey Group that searched for evidence of unconventional weapons in Iraq following the U.S.-led invasion.

Washington on Thursday said it was reasonably confident that Assad loyalists in recent months have carried out one or more limited-scale chemical attacks in Syria, likely involving the nerve agent sarin.

President Obama and his top officials have repeatedly affirmed that use or proliferation of Syrian chemical weapons would constitute an act that would demand a U.S. response.

The Thursday announcement, however, was not followed by any announcement from the White House that its threatened intervention in the Syrian civil war is now in the offing or that Assad would even be prevented from carrying out further chemical attacks.

"Were [Assad] to undertake any additional use, he would be doing so under very careful monitoring from us and the international community," a senior administration official said in a Thursday conference call with reporters. "We are going to be methodical, rigorous, and relentless in gathering the relevant information and putting it together so we can establish exactly what happened."

"If we reach a definitive determination that this red line has been crossed ... what we will be doing is consulting with our friends and allies and the international community more broadly, as well as the Syrian opposition, to determine what the best course of action is,” the staffer told reporters.

The United States has pledged nonlethal aid to the Syrian opposition but has so far avoided arming the rebels or providing any direct military assistance in the war that has already killed more than 70,000 people.

Obama first laid down his red line on chemical weapons in the Syrian civil war in August 2012. "A red line for us is (if) we see a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around, or being utilized. That would change my calculus” on whether a U.S. intervention is merited, the president said.

“We have communicated in no uncertain terms with every player in the region that that's a red line for us and that there would be enormous consequences if we start seeing movement on the chemical weapons front or the use of chemical weapons,” the president said.

While the administration did not discuss specifics, outside experts interpreted the reference to movement of chemical weapons as addressing the potential removal from storage and transport of chemical weapons for firing or for proliferation to nonstate actors. However, when the Syrian military was detected in December apparently loading sarin into aerial munitions, the administration indicated that its red line was actually carrying out a chemical attack, not readying for one.

Obama officials since then in their threats to Assad ceased mentioning the movement of chemical materials while still warning against providing them to extremist organizations.

“I want to make it absolutely clear to Assad and those under his command, the world is watching,” Obama said in December. “The use of chemical weapons is and would be totally unacceptable.”

Administration officials have always been careful to refrain from actually defining what it means for chemical weapons to be utilized; how many must be used or proliferated to warrant a U.S. reaction; and specifically what kind of a response the United States would take.

Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also in December said there was worry "that an increasingly desperate Assad regime might turn to chemical weapons, or might lose control of them. ...We have sent an unmistakable message that this would cross a red line and those responsible would be held to account."

Last month Obama said, “We have been clear that the use of chemical weapons against the Syrian people would be a serious and tragic mistake. …The Assad regime must understand that they will be held accountable for the use of chemical weapons or their transfer to terrorists."

The administration has said it has sent warnings on the matter directly to Assad.

“I do question the utility of red lines if they lack clearly delineated boundaries and meaningful consequences,” House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) said in a Thursday statement that called on the White House to make good on its threats to Assad. “I am confident the president does not wish for America’s resolve to be called into question.”

Global Green USA chemical-weapon expert Paul Walker, though, said he did not feel the administration was giving conflicting signals about where its red line lies. “I don’t think the red line has been moving but it’s still a question of what one means by use of chemical weapons.”

Kay in a Thursday interview said the lack of clarity around the red line for Syria has implications that go beyond that conflict. Other nations with their own disputes with the United States, namely Iran and North Korea, are paying attention. “You are devaluing your diplomacy when you do that because it’s going to be heard in other places.”

“We’ve used that term so often with Iran that in fact the desert must be pink,” said Kay, now a senior fellow with the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies.

The Obama administration is in a tough spot in trying to balance sending a strong deterrent signal to Assad while still giving itself enough time to make certain that a chemical strike has in fact taken place and that it knows who is responsible. Answering all of those questions is no easy feat in Syria, where the U.S. lacks its own intelligence operation and an uneasy coalition of rebel militias might have their own motivations for trying to pin a chemical attack on the regime.

Kay acknowledged that the Obama White House has the added challenge of following in the footsteps of the Bush administration, which did make good of its threats to go after Saddam Hussein only to find out afterward it had been grossly wrong in its intelligence surrounding Iraqi WMD capabilities.

“Under those conditions you have to be careful about not over threatening, particularly … about not talking about consequences that you’re not prepared to carry out,” Kay said.

Walker agreed: “We have to be careful that statements at this time do not accelerate to more than people want or is necessary.”

]]>

North Korea Situation Said to Require Careful Diplomacy

Rachel Oswald, Global Security Newswire — Tue, 02 Apr 2013 15:51:43 -0400

Dialing back escalating tensions with North Korea will require the United States and partner nations to pursue careful diplomacy and put a pause on using military assets to send the Kim regime a message, regional experts said on Tuesday.

The latest round of provocations and saber rattling kicked off with North Korea’s successful December long-range rocket launch and February nuclear test. The U.N. Security Council responded with new sanctions, witch resulted in a stream of angry rhetoric and threats from the North.

Pyongyang threatened nuclear strikes against South Korea and the United States, ordered its ballistic missile units placed on the highest alert, and on Tuesday declared it would dedicate all its atomic facilities toward the production of nuclear weapons.

Washington has responded by refocusing its ballistic missile defense strategy toward the North and sending nuclear-capable bombers and missile destroyers to the Korean Peninsula

The Obama administration was correct to “make the deterrence point” by having the B-2 and B-52 bombers conduct flyovers during U.S. military exercises with South Korea, according to East Asia expert James Schoff. With the message delivered, Washington can steer away from similar “gentle reminders” of its strategic power, he said.

The Foal Eagle exercise is to conclude on April 30. Pyongyang, which views such drills as a pretext for invasion, might ease back the ferociousness of its rhetoric as the allied maneuvers wrap up, said Schoff, a senior associate in the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s Asia Program.

“It is possible that North Korea will declare a victory and go home,” Schoff said. When no invasion takes place, Pyongyang could make the case in its domestic propaganda that it succeeded in frightening the United States and South Korea into not attacking, he explained.

Schoff said he does not believe the United States should yet seek a return to the moribund six-party talks focused on achieving permanent North Korean denuclearization. Such a move would send the wrong signal to Pyongyang that its provocative behavior is rewarded.

“That doesn’t mean we couldn’t offer some talks to reinstate the [terms of the] armistice” to the Korean War, which the North declared invalid in March, he said.

Discussions could involve South Korea and be focused on returning to an uneasy détente in which the sides reconnect their emergency hot lines and other military communication mechanisms. “If North Korea refuses that kind of an offer then it looks more clearly to the international community but also importantly to China that the problem lies in Pyongyang,” said Schoff, a former Pentagon strategic planner.

The United Nations maintains the Korean War armistice is still valid regardless of what the North might say.

The Obama administration is not likely to pursue such talks, contended Joel Wit, a former State Department official who was in charge of implementing a now-failed 1990s denuclearization accord with North Korea.

The White House is not presently interested in taking diplomatic steps to defuse tension with Pyongyang, he said in an interview that was largely critical of the U.S. approach toward North Korea. Rather, the Obama administration favors maintaining its policy of “strategic patience” in which it offers no concessions and only limited engagement until Pyongyang takes steps to halt its nuclear weapons work.

“We need a totally new policy. We need a policy that adopts strong measures to contain North Korea but also a strong diplomatic track,” said Wit who now manages the website 38 North, which tracks developments in North Korea.

With the implementation of the latest U.N. sanctions, imposition of additional U.S. economic penalties, and repositioning of military forces in the Asia-Pacific, Washington is taking strong measures to contain North Korea. However, the Obama administration is neglecting the diplomatic track, according to Wit.

The Obama administration “can’t just have a policy purely of containment,” Schoff agreed.

“I think we really do need to address core security issues on both sides, establishing permanent peace agreements on the [Korean] peninsula,” Wit said. North Korea has repeatedly called for a peace treaty to replace the armistice but Washington maintains any such treaty must come after headway is achieved in the closure of the Stalinist state’s nuclear weapons program.

In order to boost diplomatic dealings with the North, Wit advised involving officials more senior-level than special envoy Glyn Davies, who leads North Korea policy at the State Department.

“When we talk to Iran, you have an undersecretary of State participating in the multilateral meeting,” said Wit, referring to the negotiations between Iran and the five permanent U.N. Security Council members plus Germany. “We don’t have anything like that. Glyn Davies is well below the undersecretary of State level.”

Washington should take a page from Seoul, which under new President Park Geun-hye spelled out a three-step approach for building trust with North Korea, according to Wit.

The Park administration’s plan calls first for allowing humanitarian aid to the impoverished North to resume while simultaneously urging Pyongyang to adhere to agreements previously reached with Seoul. Success in that area would allow broader bilateral economic collaboration to take place that is uncoupled from denuclearization demands. Progress in this second area would be followed by expansive economic assistance to the North that is directly tied to achievements on the denuclearization front.

Park’s focus on building inter-Korean trust has not stopped her from warning that South Korea will not hesitate to respond quickly with military force if it is attacked.

Schoff said Washington might also want to reconsider its stance against permitting South Korea from using pyroprocessing technology in a new bilateral atomic trade agreement. The nuclear fuel reprocessing technique can be used to reduce atomic waste levels and to produce fissile material.

“Given the fact that North Korea is just taking all of the camouflage off of its nuclear program now, I actually don’t think it would be such a bad thing both in terms of the alliance commitment … and as a broader message to [North Korea] that its actions are not consequence free for the region,” Schoff said.

]]>

New State Dept. office to help organize sanctions efforts

Rachel Oswald, Global Security Newswire — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 16:06:01 -0500

The creation of a new office in the State Department to oversee implementation of both international and domestic sanctions is evidence of the importance of economic penalties as a U.S. foreign policy tool against nations such as Iran and North Korea, one issue expert said on Friday.

The department’s new sanctions office will be led by Ambassador Dan Fried, who formerly directed the Obama administration’s efforts to shutter the Guantanamo Bay detention facility in Cuba.

“I think this is a very critical position,” said George Lopez, a past member of the U.N. Security Council’s expert panel on North Korea sanctions.

He explained that sanctions programs focused on nonproliferation frequently involve input from a host of U.S. agencies such as State, Treasury, Energy, the CIA, and specialized task forces on science and technology. The new Foggy Bottom office can now coordinate these discussions. “So the role of this new office will be kind of a schematic coordination … keeping fingers on various pulses that are important at various times,” according to Lopez.

State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland on Wednesday explained the rationale for creating the sanctions office: “The idea here was to create a single office with maximum experience on sanctions and to follow both implementation of sanctions, new sanctions, and relief of sanctions,” she said.

“The concern was that we’ve got pieces of sanctions in many different pieces of legislation, that affect many different relationships around the world, and that it was time, rather than doing this on a regional basis, to centralize the way we looked at how we implement sanctions,” she said.

Fried will take over sanctions responsibilities formerly held by Robert Einhorn, the State Department's special adviser for nonproliferation and arms control. Nuland said Einhorn would continue to focus on diplomacy efforts around nuclear outlier nations such as Iran and North Korea.

Lopez said the U.S. government has accepted that effective sanctions must be pursued as a “very sophisticated surgical operation” that “demands a high degree of specialization” instead of being just one of many responsibilities of country desk officers at State.

Fried’s staff in the sanctions office is expected to initially encompass six to eight staffers, as well as a new No. 2 – one-time National Security Council official Richard Nephew, according to a report by Foreign Policy’s Cable blog, which cited an unidentified State Department official.

The ambassador is expected to take on a public role in promoting the utility of sanctions. “I think that is big for State to have a real visible point person for sanctions,” said a source familiar with sanctions efforts who asked to be unidentified so that he could speak frankly about the issue.

The United States has implemented asset freezes and other economic penalties against Iran over its alleged pursuit of a nuclear-weapon capability, along with successfully pushing for four rounds of U.N. punishments. Sanctions have also been issued against North Korea, Syria, and other nations believed to pose proliferation or security dangers.

Fried will also deal with sanctions covering nations such as Cuba and Russia and on measures that are in place for reasons unrelated to proliferation concerns.

In the past, some State Department officials have had “real Treasury Department envy,” the source said.

The Treasury Department for nearly a decade has had an undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence who leads an office focused on cutting funding streams to terrorist organizations, WMD proliferators, and other security threats. The current undersecretary is David Cohen.

There’s been a lot of “hand-wringing” in Foggy Bottom about not having the right tools to maximize the effectiveness of sanctions, according to the source, who credited newly retired Secretary of State Hillary Clinton with bringing a renewed focus to the issue at the department.

Lopez predicted that Fried would initially study how to respond to another nuclear test by North Korea -- an event that is expected to happen imminently. “I think he is already staying up at night worrying about what we do about that one,” said the University of Notre Dame international relations professor.

Washington already has in place harsh domestic sanctions that ban the import of all North Korean-made products. Securing tougher international sanctions by the Security Council is likely to prove difficult as veto holder China traditionally opposes measures that target its longtime ally. Council resolutions presently ban all weapons trade with Pyongyang as well as the export of luxury products to the pariah state.]]>

Agency awards grant for developing nuclear security expertise

Rachel Oswald — Fri, 10 Jun 2011 00:00:00 -0400

The U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration on Thursday announced it would give $25 million to a consortium of universities to provide hands-on training and research opportunities to the nation's next generation of nuclear security specialists.

The University of California (Berkeley) was selected to lead a group of universities in several states in the creation of the National Science and Security Consortium.

The five-year grant is to be used primarily to provide financial aid to graduate students, postdoctoral researchers and some undergraduate students interested in pursuing work on nuclear nonproliferation and security. Funds will also be used to expand the laboratories of participating universities.

The group intends to emphasize training in nuclear physics, nuclear and radiation chemistry, nuclear engineering, nuclear instrumentation and public policy, according to an NNSA press release.

"If we don't keep a vital pipeline of talent coming into our [national] laboratories and more importantly if we don't excite a new generation about the importance of working on nuclear security and nuclear nonproliferation issues then it doesn't matter how beautiful our facilities are. We will not be able to do the work that must be done," NNSA Deputy Administrator for Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Anne Harrington said at a Washington press conference.

The consortium is to prepare a series of technical conferences and summer programs on key nuclear security issues. Instruction is to be paired with research opportunities that would provide participants "experience with firsthand theoretical and experimental techniques," according to the NNSA release.

Involvement in the program is likely to lead to work at the U.S. national laboratories on nuclear security operations, the release says.

Harrington said NNSA officials hope to see a total of 230 graduate students, post-doctoral researchers and undergraduates go through the program over the next five years.

University of California (Berkeley) Nuclear Engineering Department Chairman Per Peterson told reporters that in recent years he has seen a significant uptick in the number of students interested in fields associated with nuclear stockpile maintenance, nuclear security and nuclear nonproliferation.

"We've been seeing just fantastic people applying into the field, particularly into graduate studies. These are extraordinarily bright people. We end up being very selective," Peterson said.

Peterson said he believes the heightened student interest is due to increased understanding in the years since the collapse of the Soviet Union and the September 11 attacks of the need to secure nuclear systems against potential attacks and to ensure that terrorists are unable to acquire weapon-related materials.

"They believe this is a field, this is an area where they can do work that will make a real difference for the future of the world," the Berkeley professor said of the incoming crop of nuclear security scientists.

Along with Berkeley, the participating schools are Washington University in St. Louis; the University of Nevada (Las Vegas); Michigan State University; University of California branches at Irvine and Davis; and the UC Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation in San Diego.

More than 100 scientists from universities in the consortium have signed on to participate. Peterson said public policy experts would also be involved, as would the Lawrence Berkeley, Lawrence Livermore, Los Alamos and Sandia national laboratories.

The program could include participation from NNSA staff with experience working at U.S. embassies who would introduce students to some of the international dynamics related to nonproliferation, Harrington said.

"By coordinating the efforts of multiple universities, by creating the strong linkages with world class national laboratories, these students will have opportunity to gain a much broader interdisciplinary perspective of … why it is their research matters and what it is it's going to be able to do," Peterson said, adding that the chance to use the resources of the national laboratories would be great exposure for students.

The development of new nuclear forensics capabilities is one area that the consortium is likely to emphasize, according to Harrington. Forensics involves a wide range of sciences and advanced technology used to trace the origins of a sample of radioactive material following an interdiction or possible attack.

"We can explore things like geological watermarking," she said. "We can explore different ways of developing databases and controlling databases on things like uranium ore concentrate and that could potentially develop breakthroughs."

"This is a really exciting, very open area and certainly a place where some innovation would be very welcome," Harrington added.

]]>