The New York Times reported yesterday that the United States has provided secret aid to the Pakistani military under President Gen. Pervez Musharraf for protecting its nuclear stockpile (Banaras Khan/Getty Images). U.S. Spends $100M on Pakistani Nuclear Security Pakistan since September 2001 has received nearly $100 million worth of equipment from the United States to ensure the security of the nation’s nuclear arsenal, the New York Times reported yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 15). The secret program provided helicopters, nuclear detection technology, fences and other equipment intended to prevent nuclear material, warheads and laboratory technology and expertise from falling into the wrong hands.  ..Full Story

Iran to Consider Gulf Nuclear Compromise Proposal Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad indicated yesterday that Iran would consider a proposal to operate a joint uranium enrichment facility in a neutral country to resolve its nuclear standoff with the West, the London Independent reported (see GSN, Nov. 16)...Full Story

New Law Boosts Funds for Chem-Bio Defense Industry By Elaine M. Grossman Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — U.S. President George W. Bush signed into law last week legislation providing a $20 million increase for private-sector efforts to develop chemical and biological defenses (see GSN, Nov. 1)...Full Story

	Monday, November 19, 2007

New Law Boosts Funds for Chem-Bio Defense Industry By Elaine M. Grossman Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — U.S. President George W. Bush signed into law last week legislation providing a $20 million increase for private-sector efforts to develop chemical and biological defenses (see GSN, Nov. 1). The funding boost is for the Chemical and Biological Defense Initiative, which provides Defense Department funds to industry, universities and nonprofit organizations to undertake research, development and procurement efforts.  The initiative is part of an umbrella effort called the Chemical and Biological Defense Program, which also supports work performed by Pentagon and military service laboratories. For the new fiscal year, the overall chem-bio program is funded at $1.8 billion, approximately $23 million less than requested by the administration, according to a budget analysis prepared by Alan Pearson, director of the Biological and Chemical Weapons Control Program at the Center for Arms Control and Nonproliferation. In boosting the private-sector initiative budget, the fiscal 2008 Defense Appropriations Act directs the defense secretary “to allocate these funds among the programs that yield the greatest gain in our chem-bio defensive posture,” according to a House-Senate conference report released early this month. However, the money cannot be spent until 15 days after the Pentagon submits to Congress a report describing the specific projects to be funded. The Pentagon has never requested funds for the private-sector initiative, which has instead received congressional budget additions since its inception two years ago, Pearson said.  Lawmakers provided $7 million for the program in fiscal 2006 and $10 million in 2007, he said. Physical science and technology projects funded by the initiative include chemical and biological detection, individual and collective protection gear, and decontamination equipment, according to the Pentagon’s Defense Threat Reduction Agency.  The program also underwrites medical science and technology efforts including pretreatments, therapeutics and diagnostics for exposure to chemical or biological agents. The initiative has garnered support in Congress from members seeking to boost the role of nongovernmental researchers — particularly small businesses — in developing advanced chemical and biological defenses, according to another expert who declined to be named in this article.  Growing concern on Capitol Hill about the potential for terrorist attacks using a chemical or biological weapon has created an expanding marketplace for detection, defense and response technologies, according to this source.  Lawmakers included roughly 70 earmarks for chemical and biological defense projects in the fiscal 2008 appropriations legislation, the expert said. Some pundits question whether increased industry involvement is helping strengthen chem-bio defenses or instead is an example of pork-barrel politics. “I don’t think that contracting with the private sector is necessarily inherently better than having the work carried out by government researchers,” said Pearson, noting he has more questions about the practice than answers.  “I think the strengths and weaknesses of government-conducted vs. government-funded [but] privately conducted r&d efforts for military biodefense need to be examined.” The other issue expert told Global Security Newswire “it’s hard to say” whether additional funds for the private-sector initiative will yield a net benefit “because it’s uncommitted money” until the Pentagon decides how it will be spent. “It’s an investment and it may lead to good things,” the source said.  “[But] you can’t tell till the work’s done.  It’s seed money.” The Defense Department describes its overall Chemical and Biological Defense Program as a facet of the Bush administration’s “comprehensive national strategy” for countering weapons of mass destruction. “The military mission is to dissuade, deter, defend and defeat those who seek to harm the United States, its allies and its partners through WMD use or threat of use and, if attacked, mitigate the effects and restore deterrence,” according to a Pentagon budget request justification document released in February. Responding to the proliferation of these arms, research and development monies go toward “passive defenses tailored to the unique characteristics of the various chemical and biological weapons, including emerging threats,” the budget document states.  Should an attack occur on U.S. soil or against military forces deployed abroad, the Pentagon effort offers response capabilities such as decontamination equipment and specialized medical treatment, the document explains. The program’s science and technology research, according to the defense document, includes efforts on:  advanced chemical and biological detection systems; new materials for improved filtration systems and protections systems; improved decontaminants; and diagnostics, therapeutics and vaccines for viral, bacterial, toxin and novel threat agents. More advanced development and procurement focuses on:  devices for portable detection of chemical weapons; portable decontamination systems; and nerve agent treatment systems, among other programs. The new appropriations law also provides $159 million for biological threat reduction and $6 million for chemical weapons destruction under the Pentagon’s Cooperative Threat Reduction account, according to budget analysts. Funded at $428 million for the new fiscal year — $80 million above the administration’s request — the 15-year-old effort to dismantle or secure weapons of mass destruction, primarily in the former Soviet Union, has expanded to address biological defense, illicit weapons smuggling and the rise in terrorist threats (see GSN, Nov. 12). “In terms of bang for the buck and most urgent priorities, [Cooperative Threat Reduction] is one of the most important programs that increase U.S. security by reducing the threat of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and the risk of terrorism against the United States using these weapons,” Leonor Tomero of the Center for Arms Control and Nonproliferation stated last week in an e-mail response to questions. The threat reduction program includes efforts to destroy Russian chemical weapons, though U.S. officials have experienced setbacks in their goal of eliminating the entire arsenal by April 2012 (see GSN, March 1). The appropriations act sets a 2017 deadline for destroying all U.S. lethal chemical agents and munitions (see GSN, Nov. 12).  The legislation also calls on the defense secretary to submit a report on Dec. 31, and every 180 days thereafter, documenting progress toward achieving the deadline. Lawmakers provided $1.51 billion for the Army's chemical munitions destruction program, $57 million more than the administration requested, according to Travis Sharp, another analyst at the nonprofit arms control center. The U.S. program includes work performed under the Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives program — funded at $303 million — to destroy chemical weapons stored at Blue Grass Army Depot in Kentucky and Pueblo Chemical Depot in Colorado. The additional funds for the destruction program come amid rising concerns about how safety lapses might endanger Blue Grass employees and the surrounding community (see GSN, Nov. 14). “It is hard to steer resources to international chemical weapons control efforts when domestic implementation needs to be shored up,” Sharp said. Back to top

U.S. Spends $100M on Pakistani Nuclear Security Pakistan since September 2001 has received nearly $100 million worth of equipment from the United States to ensure the security of the nation’s nuclear arsenal, the New York Times reported yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 15). The secret program provided helicopters, nuclear detection technology, fences and other equipment intended to prevent nuclear material, warheads and laboratory technology and expertise from falling into the wrong hands.  Pakistani officials received training in the United States and the program funded construction of a nuclear security training site that has not met its schedule for completion. There are concerns now in Washington whether enough has been done, given Pakistan’s ongoing domestic crisis. The Bush administration refrained from providing Pakistan with “permissive action links” that require correct codes and authorizations before enabling a nuclear weapon to detonate.  Officials in Washington felt that their Pakistani counterparts could learn too much about U.S. nuclear weapons if they obtained the PAL systems. “Lawyers say it’s classified,” said former Los Alamos National Laboratory head Harold Agnew.  “That’s nonsense.  We should share this technology.  Anybody who joins the club should be helped to get this.” “Whether it’s India or Pakistan or China or Iran,” he said, “the most important thing is that you want to make sure there is no unauthorized use.  You want to make sure that the guys who have their hands on the weapons can’t use them without proper authorization.” The Pakistani military has also proven a major barrier to the effort due to its suspicions that the actual purpose of the U.S. program is to locate the weapons and learn how they could be disabled.  Details regarding the end use of the U.S. equipment have been hard to come by, the Times reported. “Everything has taken far longer than it should,” said one former program official, “and you are never sure what you really accomplished.” Observers have long worried about the potential for terrorists to acquire a nuclear weapon from Pakistan’s arsenal.  Two U.S. intelligence assessments issued this month indicated the stockpile remains secure.  One report provided reassurances regarding security at Pakistani nuclear laboratories, which were once home to scientist and proliferator Abdul Qadeer Khan (see GSN, Sept. 27; Sanger/Broad, New York Times, Nov. 18). However, Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf warned that government control of the nation’s nuclear weapons could suffer if a “disturbed environment” accompanies upcoming elections, Reuters reported yesterday. “They cannot fall into the wrong hands, if we manage ourselves politically,” Musharraf, who set off a series of protests by declaring a state of emergency in Pakistan, told the BBC.  “The military is there — as long as the military is there, nothing happens to the strategic assets, we are in charge and nobody does anything with them” (Michael Holden, Reuters/Washington Post, Nov. 17). Back to top       Iran to Consider Gulf Nuclear Compromise Proposal Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad indicated yesterday that Iran would consider a proposal to operate a joint uranium enrichment facility in a neutral country to resolve its nuclear standoff with the West, the London Independent reported (see GSN, Nov. 16). Ahmadinejad told the Dow Jones Newswires that “we will be talking with our (Arab) friends” about the compromise proposal put forward by the six-country Gulf Cooperation Council. However, British officials said the Iranian president could be using “delaying tactics” by saying Iran would review establishment of a uranium enrichment site that would help ensure that nations seeking nuclear energy do not develop the nuclear fuel cycle that could be used for military purposes.  Similar Russian proposals have failed to find traction in Tehran (Anne Penketh, London Independent, Nov. 19). Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal said that Iranian officials during a two-day conference in Riyadh did not address the compromise proposal, Agence France-Presse reported yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 2). “They haven't discussed it.  As a matter of fact, they refused it,” he said (Agence France-Presse I/Google News, Nov. 18). Analysts said Friday that Iranian disclosures on its past nuclear activities to the U.N. nuclear watchdog appear aimed chiefly at dividing the international community over enacting a new round of sanctions, AFP reported. “Iran has again provided just enough cooperation to try to buy a further reprieve from an additional Security Council resolution,” said Mark Fitzpatrick, a nonproliferation analyst for the International Institute for Strategic Studies, in reference to the report on Iranian nuclear transparency released last week by the International Atomic Energy Agency. “It certainly is not enough for the U.S. and Europe, for whom Iran’s ongoing current activity is more problematic than the lingering questions about the past,” he said.  “However, the level of cooperation Iran showed may be enough for Russia and China.” Iran “wants to prove they’re cooperating with the U.N., while at the same time expanding their enrichment activities.  That brings them closer to the nuclear bomb,” said Simon Barrett, an Iran analyst and director of the British think tank International Media Intelligence Analysis. One IAEA official compared the difficulty of obtaining Iranian nuclear details to trying to crack a nut. “You have to ask for the precise piece of information to get at it.  It’s not thrown at you,” he said (Simon Morgan, Agence France-Presse II/Khaleej Times, Nov. 16). The head of Iran’s nuclear agency said Saturday that an IAEA delegation is expected to visit the nation in two weeks to discuss nuclear contamination discovered at an Iranian university, AFP reported. “IAEA officials will come to Iran to discuss contamination in one of Tehran's universities in two weeks," said Iranian Atomic Energy Organization head Gholamreza Aghazadeh. As part of its work plan on Iranian nuclear transparency, the agency is seeking information regarding “the origin of the uranium particle contamination found in a technical university in Tehran.”  The agency is seeking disclosure on the “nature of the equipment, the envisioned use of the equipment and the names and roles of individuals and entities involved” (Agence France-Presse III/Google News, Nov. 17). Meanwhile, Israel and the United States have begun developing secret plans for contending with Iran if it becomes a nuclear weapons power, the London Telegraph reported yesterday. While Israel and the United States have maintained their public stance that they would not allow Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon, military analysts and intelligence officials have warned that Tehran has been hiding and distributing its nuclear capabilities more effectively than once suspected, the Telegraph said. U.S. Defense Department strategists have been revising deterrence policies to contain a nuclear-armed Iran even as the Bush administration stands by the national security policy of pre-emptive action it adopted after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. “The more they looked at the intelligence and the information they had, the more pessimistic they have become about what could be achieved on the operational front by military action," said Pentagon adviser Dan Goure. “Military strikes might only set the program back a couple of years, but the current thinking is that it is just not worth the risks,” Goure said. Israel has also begun reformulating its security strategy in case it ceases to be the only nuclear-armed power in the region.  Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert asked security officials last weekend to complete proposals for dealing with a nuclear-armed Iran, sources said (Sherwell/Kalman, London Telegraph, Nov. 18). In Kuwait, former U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said yesterday that Iran had long to go before it possessed nuclear weapons and the United States is unlikely to attack Iranian nuclear facilities despite suspicions about the country’s nuclear ambitions, the Associated Press reported. “I think Iran is a long way from having anything that could be anything like a nuclear weapon,” the former U.S. general said in an address to the National Bank of Kuwait on Middle Eastern political turmoil and economic opportunities. Powell said he did not see an attack on Iran as likely but that military action has not yet been taken “off the table” (Diana Elias, Associated Press I/Google News, Nov. 19). EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana is expected to consult with the 27 EU foreign ministers today as they deliberate over whether to impose new sanctions against Iran over its uranium enrichment, AP reported. Solana has planned to discuss European options for addressing the nuclear standoff with Iran, said Portuguese envoy Alvaro Mendonca e Moura.  France and the United Kingdom are expected to push for new punitive measures. “We said we would consider what additional measures we might take in order to support the U.N. process,” said Mendonca e Moura, whose country holds the rotating EU presidency.  The ministers last month were unable to reach agreement on new sanctions (Constant Brand, Associated Press II/International Herald Tribune, Nov. 18). Solana today asked Iranian officials to meet with him this week before he reports to Germany and the five permanent U.N. Security Council members on Tehran’s nuclear program, AFP reported. “I have been in touch with the Iranians.  I hope that they will find time in their calendar to meet this week.  That is my position, and that is what I transmit to them in a very clear manner,” Solana said as he reached Brussels to attend the ministerial meeting. “We're pretty late in the month already,” he said in reference to his deadline for reporting to China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States on Iranian nuclear intentions (Agence France-Presse IV/Spacewar.com, Nov. 19). China said late Friday that it would attend the meeting with the U.N. powers on Iran’s nuclear program following its earlier refusal, the Washington Post reported. China initially threatened not to attend the meeting, tentatively scheduled for next week.  Bush administration officials plan to present the case for imposing a new round of sanctions against Iran over its refusal to halt uranium enrichment in accordance with previous Security Council demands. Beijing reversed its position after the United States demanded that it be more “resolute” following the U.N. nuclear watchdog’s report that knowledge of current Iranian nuclear activities has been “diminishing” since last year (Robin Wright, Washington Post I, Nov. 16). U.S. and European officials have said China’s expanding economic ties to Iran are hurting international efforts to ensure that Tehran cannot use its nuclear program for military purposes, the Post reported yesterday. According to PFC Energy manager David Kirsch, Iran is China’s largest oil supplier, providing 14 percent of China’s annual consumption. Iran imports ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and other heavy military equipment from China as well as technical assistance for its domestic missile program. “Iran has become the engineer of China’s economic growth. It may not be like Saudi Arabia is to the U.S. economy, but it's close,” said American Foreign Policy Council Vice President Ilan Berman. “We're presenting China with an untenable proposition.  We're asking them to unilaterally divest from Iran and not offering them energy alternatives.  This is not sustainable for policy-makers whose predominant priority is to maintain and expand their country's growth,” he said (Robin Wright, Washington Post II, Nov. 18). IAEA inspectors plan to travel to Russia this month as Moscow prepares to ship its first nuclear fuel to Iran, United Press International reported Friday. The officials must inspect and seal the nuclear fuel containers before they are transported to Iran’s Bushehr nuclear power plant, RIA Novosti said (United Press International, Nov. 16). Back to top       Plan Set for Russian Plutonium Conversion Russia and the United States have agreed on a plan for Moscow to follow through on a 2000 agreement under which both nations pledged to eliminate 34 metric tons of weapon-grade plutonium, the U.S. Energy Department announced today (see GSN, Sept. 19). The former Cold War rivals agreed to convert at least 68 metric tons of surplus plutonium into mixed-oxide fuel that could be used in nuclear power reactors.  Construction began in August of the U.S. plant at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina (see GSN, Aug. 2). Work in Russia has been slowed by complaints over U.S. funding for the project (see GSN, April 16), liability issues and Moscow’s demands regarding the type of reactor it can use to burn the excess plutonium (see GSN, Sept. 18, 2006). The plan signed by Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman and Federal Atomic Energy Agency Director Sergei Kiriyenko calls for Russia with U.S. support “to convert Russian weapon-grade plutonium into mixed-oxide fuel and irradiate the MOX fuel in the BN-600 fast reactor, currently operating at the Beloyarsk nuclear power plant, and in the BN-800 fast reactor, currently under construction at the same site,” according to an NNSA press release. The United States plans to provide $400 million for the work, which would begin around 2012 and eliminate roughly 1.5 metric tons of plutonium each year. Russia pledged that the program would not produce new stocks of weapon-grade plutonium, one of the concerns regarding the fast neutron reactors. Development is also set to proceed of an advanced gas-cooled, high-temperature reactor which could be used at some point to convert additional Russian plutonium (U.S. Energy Department release, Nov. 19). Back to top       Results Seen in North Korea Nuclear Talks, Bush Says The six-party talks have produced “measurable results” in encouraging North Korea to eliminate its nuclear program, U.S. President George W. Bush said Friday (see GSN, Nov. 16). While disablement has begun of primary facilities at the Yongbyon nuclear complex, Bush said “hard work remains to be done,” the Washington Times reported. “North Korea has agreed to provide a full declaration of all its nuclear programs and proliferation activities by the end of this year,” Bush said while meeting in Washington with Japanese Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda.  “Full declaration is one of the next steps North Korea must take to keep the six-party talks moving.” North Korea agreed last month as part of the denuclearization process to issue a declaration covering “all nuclear facilities, materials and programs.”  The agreement did not address proliferation efforts. Bush could be indicating that he expects Pyongyang to unveil any nuclear cooperation with Syria (see GSN, Nov. 14).  Published reports have indicated that North Korea was helping Syria to build a nuclear reactor that was the suspected target of a Sept. 6 Israeli air strike. “I’m not sure that North Korea has agreed to provide a full declaration of its proliferation activities,” said Richard Bush, director of the Center for Northeast Asian Studies at the Brookings Institution.  “I suspect that the words ‘proliferation activities’ are code for the Syria program, and we have decided we need an explanation of what was going on in Syria in order to close any deals” (Jon Ward, Washington Times, Nov. 17). One former senior U.S. diplomat said today that significant obstacles remain to fully shuttering North Korea’s nuclear program, the Associated Press reported. Pyongyang still could uncover loopholes in denuclearization agreements that it would use to hold onto nuclear weapon material, said Robert Gallucci, who signed the 1994 Agreed Framework that was intended to end North Korean nuclear work.  The deal collapsed in 2002 after the Bush administration claimed that North Korea was operating a secret uranium enrichment program for weapons purposes. Continued progress in the nuclear area is necessary if leaders hope to see an official peace on the Korean Peninsula, Gallucci, dean of Georgetown University’s foreign service school, said during a conference in Seoul. Mechanisms for verifying the North Korean nuclear declaration remain unknown, he said. “In light of the North’s past record on compliance, if provisions for inspections are clearly inadequate, it will be a great disappointment,” Gallucci said (Burt Herman, Associated Press/Washington Post, Nov. 19). Back to top       Uncertainty Remains Over U.S.-Indian Nuclear Deal Analysts say a concession by Indian communists allowing the Singh administration to pursue a nuclear safeguards agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency does not guarantee the passage of a nuclear trade agreement with the United States, Agence France-Presse reported yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 16). The deal faces a number of hurdles, including gaining approval from U.S. lawmakers and the Nuclear Suppliers Group. “The logjam has been broken but the agreement is still not completely in the clear,” said Indian political analyst Uday Bhaskhar. Smruti Patnaik of the Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses called the agreement to pursue safeguards talks “a positive development even if there is some way to go.” Under the deal, New Delhi would open its civilian nuclear sites to IAEA monitoring in exchange for access to U.S. nuclear materials and technology. India’s communists relented over the talks following months of vocal opposition because they were left politically vulnerable by the recent killings of at least six activists in their stronghold state of West Bengal, said Rajeshwari Rajagopalan, an analyst for the Observer Research Foundation in New Delhi, “The communists are very much on the defensive — that's why the 180-degree turn,” Rajagopalan said. A.B. Bardhan, general secretary of the Communist Party of India, and other senior communist officials have said their acceptance of safeguards talks does not imply they have agreed to the overall nuclear trade deal. “It (approval) will go stage-by-stage,” Bardhan said (Penny MacRae, Agence France-Presse/Google News, Nov. 18). Back to top       Brazil Denies Nuclear Weapons Ambitions Brazil is not seeking nuclear weapons, the country’s defense minister said Thursday after a general asserted that a nuclear deterrent was necessary to survive in a “more violent and unpredictable world,” Bloomberg reported (see GSN, May 8, 2006). “We must have in Brazil the capacity of in the future, if the government agrees, to develop nuclear weapons,” said Gen. Jose Benedito de Barros Moreira earlier last week. Defense Minister Nelson Jobim said in response to speculation sparked by Moreira’s remarks that Brazil’s nuclear ambitions “aren’t for a nuclear bomb, that’s just nonsense,” according to a transcript released by his office. Brazil intends to spend $596 million over the next eight years to fund the construction of a nuclear submarine and several nuclear power plants (Andrew Soliani, Bloomberg, Nov. 16). Back to top

China Increases Lab Security for Olympics China has stepped up security measures in its capital’s 27 veterinary laboratories to help prevent potential terrorists from obtaining biological agents they could use to stage an attack on the 2008 Olympic Games, China Daily reported today (see GSN, June 28). The facilities are to undergo monthly inspections to test the potential for theft of stored viruses, bacteria and other potentially harmful agents. Beijing is expected to increase monitoring of biological agents that cause diseases in animals, determining which can be grown, preserved or transported.  The government is also striving to publicize the danger of biological terrorism, according to Beijing Animal Health Supervision Institute Director Li Quanlu. The Beijing Agriculture Bureau has received signed pledges from the laboratories stating they would not leak any harmful biological agents during the Olympics, according to the Beijing Youth Daily.  The office has asked the laboratories to set up biological safety management committees by the end of the week (Wang Ying, China Daily, Nov. 19). Back to top       Research Could Aid Smallpox Vaccine Development Research at the Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis could promote design of new vaccines against diseases such as the potential bioterrorism agent smallpox, the university announced last week (see GSN, July 3). Researchers found in animal testing that the cowpox virus is able to prevent corrupted cells from transmitting warnings to the immune system regarding a spreading infection.  They believe this same capability lies in other, more dangerous poxviruses, according to research published in the journal Cell Host and Microbe. “The study’s authors say the finding will help efforts to design new vaccines for use against cowpox, monkeypox and, if it ever became a concern again, smallpox,” according to a press release. Smallpox has been eliminated in nature but remains held in small amounts by Russia and the United States.  “Those samples have led to concern that terrorists might try to obtain smallpox and use it in a bioterror attack,” the university said. Research is continuing, the university said (Washington University School of Medicine release, Nov. 15). Back to top

Japan Completes Sea-Based Missile-Tracking Drill The Aegis-equipped Japanese destroyer JDS Kongo on Thursday successfully tracked a test missile fired from Hawaii, the U.S. Missile Defense Agency said (see GSN, Oct. 16). Destroyer personnel detected the target shortly after it was launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility at Barking Sands on the island of Kauai.  Using the destroyer’s 3.6 Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System, they tracked the target, calculated a firing trajectory and conducted a simulated launch of a Standard Missile 3 Block IA interceptor. The Aegis system, functioning as expected, completed a simulated interception of the target in a matter of minutes.  The target then dropped into the Pacific Ocean (U.S. Missile Defense Agency release, Nov. 16). Back to top

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

© Copyright 2008 by National Journal Group, Inc. The material in this section is produced independently for NTI by National Journal Group, Inc. Any reproduction or retransmission, in whole or in part, is a violation of federal law and is strictly prohibited without the consent of the National Journal Group, Inc. All rights reserved.